Electronics 08 00292 PDF

Review
A State-of-the-Art Survey on Deep Learning Theory

and Architectures
Md Zahangir Alom 1,*, Tarek M. Taha 1, Chris Yakopcic 1, Stefan Westberg 1, Paheding Sidike 2,
Mst Shamima Nasrin 1, Mahmudul Hasan 3, Brian C. Van Essen 4, Abdul A. S. Awwal 4
and Vijayan K. Asari 1
1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Dayton, OH 45469, USA;
ttaha1@udayton.edu (T.M.T.); cyakopcic1@udayton.edu (C.Y.); westbergs1@udayton.edu (S.W.);
nasrinm1@udayton.edu (M.S.N.); vasari1@udayton.edu (V.K.A.)
2 Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Saint Louis University, MO 63108, USA;
sidike.paheding@slu.edu
3 Comcast Labs, Washington, DC 20005, USA; mahmud.ucr@gmail.com
4 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, CA 94550, USA;
vanessen1@llnl.gov (B.C.V.E.); awwal1@llnl.gov (A.A.S.A.)

* Correspondence: alomm1@udayton.edu
Received: 17 January 2019; Accepted: 31 January 2019; Published: 5 March 2019
Abstract: In recent years, deep learning has garnered tremendous success in a variety of application
domains. This new field of machine learning has been growing rapidly and has been applied to
most traditional application domains, as well as some new areas that present more opportunities.
Different methods have been proposed based on different categories of learning, including
supervised, semi-supervised, and un-supervised learning. Experimental results show state-of-the-
art performance using deep learning when compared to traditional machine learning approaches in
the fields of image processing, computer vision, speech recognition, machine translation, art,
medical imaging, medical information processing, robotics and control, bioinformatics, natural
language processing, cybersecurity, and many others. This survey presents a brief survey on the
advances that have occurred in the area of Deep Learning (DL), starting with the Deep Neural
Network (DNN). The survey goes on to cover Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Recurrent
Neural Network (RNN), including Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Gated Recurrent Units
(GRU), Auto-Encoder (AE), Deep Belief Network (DBN), Generative Adversarial Network (GAN),
and Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL). Additionally, we have discussed recent developments,
such as advanced variant DL techniques based on these DL approaches. This work considers most
of the papers published after 2012 from when the history of deep learning began. Furthermore, DL
approaches that have been explored and evaluated in different application domains are also
included in this survey. We also included recently developed frameworks, SDKs, and benchmark
datasets that are used for implementing and evaluating deep learning approaches. There are some
surveys that have been published on DL using neural networks and a survey on Reinforcement
Learning (RL). However, those papers have not discussed individual advanced techniques for
training large-scale deep learning models and the recently developed method of generative models.
Keywords: deep learning; convolutional neural network (CNN); recurrent neural network (RNN);
auto-encoder (AE); restricted Boltzmann machine (RBM); deep belief network (DBN); generative
adversarial network (GAN); deep reinforcement learning (DRL); transfer learning
Electronics 2019, 8, 292; doi:10.3390/electronics8030292 www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 2 of 67
1. Introduction
Since the 1950s, a small subset of Artificial Intelligence (AI), often called Machine Learning (ML),
has revolutionized several fields in the last few decades. Neural Networks (NN) is a subfield of ML,
and it was this subfield that spawned Deep Learning (DL). Since its inception DL has been creating
ever larger disruptions, showing outstanding success in almost every application domain. Figure 1
shows the taxonomy of AI. DL which uses either deep architectures of learning or hierarchical
learning approaches), is a class of ML developed largely from 2006 onward. Learning is a procedure
consisting of estimating the model parameters so that the learned model (algorithm) can perform a
specific task. For example, in Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), the parameters are the weight
matrices. DL, on the other hand, consists of several layers in between the input and output layer
which allows for many stages of non-linear information processing units with hierarchical
architectures to be present that are exploited for feature learning and pattern classification [1,2].
Learning methods based on representations of data can also be defined as representation learning
[3]. Recent literature states that DL based representation learning involves a hierarchy of features or
concepts, where the high-level concepts can be defined from the low-level ones and low-level
concepts can be defined from high-level ones. In some articles, DL has been described as a universal
learning approach that is able to solve almost all kinds of problems in different application domains.
In other words, DL is not task specific [4].
1.1. Type of Deep Learning Approaches

Deep learning approaches can be categorized as follows: Supervised, semi-supervised or
partially supervised, and unsupervised. In addition, there is another category of learning approach
called Reinforcement Learning (RL) or Deep RL (DRL) which are often discussed under the scope of
semi-supervised or sometimes under unsupervised learning approaches. Figure 2 shows the pictorial
diagram.
Figure 1. The taxonomy of AI. AI: Artificial Intelligence; ML: Machine Learning; NN: Neural
Networks; DL: Deep Learning; SNN: Spiking Neural Networks.
1.1.1. Deep Supervised Learning

Supervised learning is a learning technique that uses labeled data. In the case of supervised DL
approaches, the environment has a set of inputs and corresponding outputs ( , )~ . For example,
if for input xt, the intelligent agent predicts = ( ), the agent will receive a loss value ( , ).
The agent will then iteratively modify the network parameters for a better approximation of the
desired outputs. After successful training, the agent will be able to get the correct answers to
questions from the environment. There are different supervised learning approaches for deep
leaning, including Deep Neural Networks (DNN), Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN),
Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN), including Long Short Term Memory (LSTM), and Gated
Recurrent Units (GRU). These networks will be described in details in the respective sections.
1.1.2. Deep Semi-supervised Learning

Semi-supervised learning is learning that occurs based on partially labeled datasets. In some
cases, DRL and Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) are used as semi-supervised learning
techniques. GAN is discussed in Section 7. Section 8 surveys DRL approaches. Additionally, RNN,
including LSTM and GRU, are used for semi-supervised learning as well.
1.1.3. Deep Unsupervised Learning

Unsupervised learning systems are ones that can without the presence of data labels. In this case,
the agent learns the internal representation or important features to discover unknown relationships
or structure within the input data. Often clustering, dimensionality reduction, and generative
techniques are considered as unsupervised learning approaches. There are several members of the
deep learning family that are good at clustering and non-linear dimensionality reduction, including
Auto-Encoders (AE), Restricted Boltzmann Machines (RBM), and the recently developed GAN. In
addition, RNNs, such as LSTM and RL, are also used for unsupervised learning in many application
domains. Sections 6 and 7 discuss RNNs and LSTMs in detail.
1.1.4. Deep Reinforcement Learning (RL)

Deep Reinforcement Learning is a learning technique for use in unknown environments. DRL
began in 2013 with Google Deep Mind [5,6]. From then on, several advanced methods have been
proposed based on RL. Here is an example of RL: If environment samples inputs: ~ , agent
predict: = ( ) , agent receive cost: ~ ( | , ) where P is an unknown probability
distribution, the environment asks an agent a question, and gives a noisy score as the answer.
Sometimes this approach is called semi-supervised learning as well. There are many semi-supervised
and un-supervised techniques that have been implemented based on this concept (in Section 8). In
RL, we do not have a straight forward loss function, thus making learning harder compared to
traditional supervised approaches. The fundamental differences between RL and supervised learning
are: First, you do not have full access to the function you are trying to optimize; you must query them
through interaction, and second, you are interacting with a state-based environment: Input
depends on previous actions.
Depending upon the problem scope or space, one can decide which type of RL needs to be
applied for solving a task. If the problem has a lot of parameters to be optimized, DRL is the best way
to go. If the problem has fewer parameters for optimization, a derivation free RL approach is good.
An example of this is annealing, cross entropy methods, and SPSA.
Figure 2. Category of Deep Leaning approaches.
1.2. Feature Learning

A key difference between traditional ML and DL is in how features are extracted. Traditional
ML approaches use handcrafted engineering features by applying several feature extraction
algorithms, and then apply the learning algorithms. Additionally, other boosting approaches are
often used where several learning algorithms are applied to the features of a single task or dataset
and a decision is made according to the multiple outcomes from the different algorithms.
On the other hand, in the case of DL, the features are learned automatically and are represented
hierarchically in multiple levels. This is the strong point of DL against traditional machine learning
approaches. Table 1 shows the different feature-based learning approaches with different learning
steps.
Table 1. Different feature learning approaches.
Approaches Learning steps

Hand-design
Rule-based Input Output
features
Traditional Machine Hand-design Mapping from
Input Output
Learning features features
Representation Mapping from
Input Features Output
Learning features
Complex Mapping from
Deep Learning Input Simple features Output
features features
1.3. Why and When to apply DL

DL is employed in several situations where machine intelligence would be useful (see Figure 3):
 Absence of a human expert (navigation on Mars)
 Humans are unable to explain their expertise (speech recognition, vision, and language
understanding)
 The solution to the problem changes over time (tracking, weather prediction, preference,
stock, price prediction)
 Solutions need to be adapted to the particular cases (biometrics, personalization).
 The problem size is too vast for our limited reasoning capabilities (calculation webpage
ranks, matching ads to Facebook, sentiment analysis).
At present, DL is being applied in almost all areas. As a result, this approach is often called a
universal learning approach.
1.4. The State-of-the-art Performance of DL

There are some outstanding successes in the fields of computer vision and speech recognition as
discussed below:
(a). Image classification on ImageNet dataset. One of the large-scale problems is named Large
Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (LSVRC). CNN and its variants as one of the DL branches showed
state-of-the-art accuracy on the ImageNet task [7–12]. The following graph shows the success story
of DL techniques overtime on ImageNet-2012 challenge. Figure 3 shows that ResNet-152 has achieved
3.57% error rate which outperformed human accuracy.
The experimental results on ImageNet-2012

18 16.4
16
14
11.2
12
Erros (%)
10
7.4 6.7
8
6 5
3.57
4
2
0
2012 2013 2014 2014 2015
AlexNet[7] Clarifia[8] VGG-16 [9] GoogLeNet- ResNet- Human

19 [10] 152[11]
Model & Year
Figure 3. Accuracy for ImageNet classification challenge with different DL models.
Phone error rate (PER) in percentage(%)
Segmental RNN[23]
Attention-based RNN[22]
RNN transducer[19]
Ensemble DNN/CNN/RNN[21]
DCNN [20]
CTC[19]
CDNN w. Hater.s Pooling[18]
DSC with 2nd pass[16]
End-to-end DL [17]
Discriminative segmetal cascade (DSC)[16]
Deep Segmental NN[15]
Boundary-factored SCRF[14]
First-pass SCRF [13]
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Figure 4. Phone error rate (PER) for TIMIT Acoustic-Phonetic Continuous Speech Corpus dataset [13–
23].
(b). Automatic speech recognition. The initial success in the field of speech recognition on the
popular TIMIT dataset (common data set are generally used for evaluation) was with small-scale
recognition tasks [24]. The TIMIT Acoustic-Phonetic continuous speech Corpus contains 630 speakers
from eight major dialects of American English, where each speaker reads 10 sentences. Figure 4
summarizes the error rates, including these early results and is measured as a percent phone error
rate (PER) over the last 20 years. The bar graph clearly shows that the recently developed DL
approaches (top of the graph) perform better compared to any other previous machine learning
approaches on the TIMIT dataset.
Some example applications are shown in Figures 5 and 6.
Road 1 Road 2
Road 3
Figure 5. Data-driven traffic forecasting. Using the dynamics of the traffic flow (roads 1, 2, and 3) to
capture the spatial dependency using by Diffusion Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network [25].
Semantic segmentation [27]

Lymphocyte detection [26]
Nuclei segmentation [28] Blood cell classification [29]
Figure 6. Example images where DL is applied successfully and achieved state-of-the-art

performance. The images were taken from the correspond ding references.
1.5. Why DL?
1.5.1. Universal Learning Approach

The DL approach is sometimes called universal learning because it can be applied to almost any
application domain.
1.5.2. Robust
Deep learning approaches do not require the precisely designed feature. Instead, optimal
features are automatically learned for the task at hand. As a result, the robustness to natural
variations of the input data is achieved.
1.5.3. Generalization
The same DL approach can be used in different applications or with different data types. This
approach is often called transfer learning. In addition, this approach is helpful where the problem
does not have sufficient available data. There are a number of literatures that have discussed this
concept (See Section 4).
1.5.4. Scalability
The DL approach is highly scalable. Microsoft invented a deep network known as ResNet [11].
This network contains 1202 layers and is often implemented at a supercomputing scale. There is a big
initiative at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in developing frameworks for
networks like this, which can implement thousands of nodes [24].
1.6. Challenges of DL
There are several challenges for DL:
 Big data analytics using DL
 Scalability of DL approaches
 Ability to generate data which is important where data is not available for learning the
system (especially for computer vision task, such as inverse graphics).
 Energy efficient techniques for special purpose devices, including mobile intelligence,
FPGAs, and so on.
 Multi-task and transfer learning or multi-module learning. This means learning from
different domains or with different models together.
 Dealing with causality in learning.
Most of the above-mentioned challenges have already been considered by the DL community.
Firstly, for the big data analytics challenge, there is a good survey that was conducted in 2014 [30]. In
this paper, the authors explained details on how DL can deal with different criteria, including
volume, velocity, variety, and veracity of the big data problem. The authors also showed different
advantages of DL approaches when dealing with big data problems [31,32]. Figure 7 clearly
demonstrates that the performance of traditional ML approaches shows better performance for lesser
amounts of input data. As the amount of data increases beyond a certain number, the performance
of traditional machine learning approaches becomes steady, whereas DL approaches increase with
respect to the increment of the amount of data.
Figure 7. The performance of deep learning with respect to the amount of data.
Secondly, in most of the cases for solving large-scale problems, the solution is being
implemented on High-Performance Computing (HPC) system (super-computing, cluster, sometimes
considered cloud computing) which offers immense potential for data-intensive business computing.
As data explodes in velocity, variety, veracity, and volume, it is getting increasingly difficult to scale
compute performance using enterprise-class servers and storage in step with the increase. Most of
the articles considered all the demands and suggested efficient HPC with heterogeneous computing
systems. In one example, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) has developed a
framework which is called Livermore Big Artificial Neural Networks (LBANN) for large-scale
implementation (in super-computing scale) for DL which clearly supplants the issue of scalability of
DL [24].
Thirdly, generative models are another challenge for deep learning. One example is the GAN,
which is an outstanding approach for data generation for any task which can generate data with the
same distribution [33]. Fourthly, multi-task and transfer learning which we have discussed in Section
7. Fourthly, there is a lot of research that has been conducted on energy efficient deep learning
approaches with respect to network architectures and hardwires. Section 10 discusses this issue.
Can we make any uniform model that can solve multiple tasks in different application domains?
As far as the multi-model system is concerned, one article from Google titled One Model To Learn
Them All [34] is a good example. This approach can learn from different application domains,
including ImageNet, multiple translation tasks, Image captioning (MS-COCO dataset), speech
recognition corpus and English parsing task. We will be discussing most of the challenges and
respective solutions through this survey. There are some other multi-task techniques that have been
proposed in the last few years [35–37].
Finally, a learning system with causality has been presented, which is a graphical model that
defines how one may infer a causal model from data. Recently a DL based approach has been
proposed for solving this type of problem [38]. However, there are other many challenging issues
have been solved in the last few years which were not possible to solve efficiently before this
revolution. For example, image or video captioning [39], style transferring from one domain to
another domain using GAN [40], text to image synthesis [41], and many more [42].
There are some surveys that have been conducted recently in the DL field [43–46]. These papers
survey on DL and its revolution, but they did not address the recently developed generative model
called GAN [33]. In addition, they discuss little RL and did not cover recent trends of DRL approaches
[1,44]. In most of the cases, the surveys that have been conducted are on different DL approaches
individually. There is a good survey which is based on Reinforcement Learning approaches [46,47].
Another survey exists on transfer learning [48]. One survey has been conducted on neural network
hardware [49]. However, the main objective of this work is to provide an overall idea on deep
learning and its related fields, including deep supervised (e.g., DNN, CNN, and RNN), unsupervised
(e.g., AE, RBM, GAN) (sometimes GAN also used for semi-supervised learning tasks) and DRL. In
some cases, DRL is considered to be a semi-supervised or an unsupervised approach. In addition, we
have considered the recently developing trends in this field and applications which are developed
based on these techniques. Furthermore, we have included the framework and benchmark datasets
which are often used for evaluating deep learning techniques. Moreover, the name of the conferences
and journals are also included which are considered by this community for publishing their research
articles.
The rest of the paper has been organized in the following ways: The detailed surveys of DNNs
are discussed in Section 2, Section 3 discusses on CNN. Section 4 describes different advanced
techniques for efficient training of DL approaches. Section 5 discusses RNNs. AEs and RBMs are
discussed in Section 6. GANs with applications are discussed in Section 7. RL is presented in Section
8. Section 9 explains transfer learning. Section 10 presents energy efficient approaches and hardwires
for DL. Section 11 discusses deep learning frameworks and standard development kits (SDK). The
benchmarks for different application domains with web links are given in Section 12. The conclusions
are made in Section 13.
2. Deep Neural Network
2.1. The History of DNN

A brief history of neural networks highlighting key events is, as shown in Figure 8.
Computational neurobiology has conducted significant research on constructing computational
models of artificial neurons. Artificial neurons, which try to mimic the behavior of the human brain,
are the fundamental component for building ANNs. The basic computational element (neuron) is
called a node (or unit) which receives inputs from external sources and has some internal parameters
(including weights and biases that are learned during training) which produce outputs. This unit is
called a perceptron. The fundamental of ANN is discussed in References [1,3].
1943 - present
•1943: McCulloch & Pitts show that neurons can be combined to construct a Turing
machine [50].
•1958: Rosenblatt shows that perceptron’s will converge if what they are trying to
learn can be represented [51].
•1969: Minsky & Papert show the limitations of perceptron’s, killing research in
neural networks for a decade [52].
•1985: The backpropagation algorithm by Geoffrey Hinton et al. [53] revitalizes the
field.
•1988: Neocognitron: a hierarchical neural network capable of visual pattern
recognition [54].
•1998: CNNs with Backpropagation for document analysis by Yan LeCun [55].
•2006: The Hinton lab solves the training problem for DNNs [56,57].
•2012 - pressent: A variety of deep learning algorithms are increasingly emerging.
Figure 8. The history of deep learning development [50–57].

ANNs or general NNs consist of Multilayer Perceptron’s (MLP) which contain one or more
hidden layers with multiple hidden units (neurons) in them. For details on MLP, please see in
References [1,3,53]
2.2. Gradient Descent

The gradient descent approach is a first-order optimization algorithm which is used for finding
the local minima of an objective function. This has been used for training ANNs in the last couple of
decades successfully [1,53].
2.3. Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD)

Since a long training time is the main drawback for the traditional gradient descent approach,
the SGD approach is used for training Deep Neural Networks (DNN) [1,58].
2.4. Back-Propagation (BP)

DNN is trained with the popular Back-Propagation (BP) algorithm with SGD [47,53]. In the case
of MLPs, we can easily represent NN models using computation graphs which are directive acyclic
graphs. For that representation of DL, we can use the chain-rule to efficiently calculate the gradient
from the top to the bottom layers with BP, as shown in References [53,59–63].
2.5. Momentum
Momentum is a method which helps to accelerate the training process with the SGD approach.
The main idea behind it is to use the moving average of the gradient instead of using only the current
real value of the gradient. We can express this with the following equation mathematically:
=γ − ∇ ℱ( ), (1)
= + , (2)
here γ is the momentum and is the learning rate for the tth round of training. Other popular
approaches have been introduced during the last few years which are explained in section IX under
the scope of optimization approaches. The main advantage of using momentum during training is to
prevent the network from getting stuck in local minimum. The values of momentum are γ ∈ (0,1]. It
is noted that a higher momentum value overshoots its minimum, possibly making the network
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 10 of 67
unstable. In general, γ is set to 0.5 until the initial learning stabilizes and is then increased to 0.9 or
higher [60].
2.6. Learning Rate ( )

The learning rate is an important component for training DNN. The learning rate is the step size
considered during training which makes the training process faster. However, selecting the value of
the learning rate is sensitive. For example: If you choose a larger value for , the network may start
diverging instead of converging. On the other hand, if you choose a smaller value for , it will take
more time for the network to converge. In addition, it may easily get stuck in local minima. The
typical solution to this problem is to reduce the learning rate during training [64].
There are three common approaches used for reducing the learning rate during training:
Constant, factored, and exponential decay. First, we can define a constant which is applied to
reduce the learning rate manually with a defined step function. Second, the learning rate can be
adjusted during training with the following equation:
= , (3)
where is the tth round learning rate, is the initial learning rate, and is the decay factor with
a value between the range of (0,1).
The step function format for exponential decay is:
= . (4)
The common practice is to use a learning rate decay of = 0.1 to reduce the learning rate by a
factor of 10 at each stage.
2.7. Weight Decay

Weight decay is used for training deep learning models as an L2 regularization approach, which
helps to prevent overfitting the network and model generalization. L2 regularization for ℱ( , ) can
be defined as,
Ω=‖ ‖ , (5)
1
(̂ ℱ( , ), ) = (ℱ( , ), ) + Ω. (6)
2
The gradient for the weight is:
1
Ω
2 = ∙ . (7)
General practice is to use the value = 0.0004. A smaller will accelerate training.
Other necessary components for efficient training, including data preprocessing and
augmentation, network initialization approaches, batch normalization, activation functions,
regularization with dropout, and different optimization approaches (as discussed in Section 4).
In the last few decades, many efficient approaches have been proposed for better training of
deep neural networks. Before 2006, attempts taken at training deep architectures failed: Training a
deep supervised feed-forward neural network tended to yield worse results (both in training and in
test error) than shallow ones (with 1 or 2 hidden layers). Hinton’s revolutionary work on DBNs
spearheaded a change in this in 2006 [56,59].
Due to their composition, many layers of DNNs are more capable of representing highly varying
nonlinear functions compared to shallow learning approaches [62–65]. Moreover, DNNs are more
efficient for learning because of the combination of feature extraction and classification layers. The
following sections discuss in detail about different DL approaches with necessary components.
3. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 11 of 67
3.1. CNN Overview

This network structure was first proposed by Fukushima in 1988 [54]. It was not widely used,
however, due to limits of computation hardware for training the network. In the 1990s, LeCun et al.
[55] applied a gradient-based learning algorithm to CNNs and obtained successful results for the
handwritten digit classification problem. After that, researchers further improved CNNs and
reported state-of-the-art results in many recognition tasks. CNNs have several advantages over
DNNs, including being more like the human visual processing system, being highly optimized in the
structure for processing 2D and 3D images, and being effective at learning and extracting abstractions
of 2D features. The max pooling layer of CNNs is effective in absorbing shape variations. Moreover,
composed of sparse connections with tied weights, CNNs have significantly fewer parameters than
a fully connected network of similar size. Most of all, CNNs are trained with the gradient-based
learning algorithm and suffer less from the diminishing gradient problem. Given that the gradient-
based algorithm trains the whole network to minimize an error criterion directly, CNNs can produce
highly optimized weights.
Figure 9 shows the overall architecture of CNNs consists of two main parts: Feature extractors
and a classifier. In the feature extraction layers, each layer of the network receives the output from its
immediate previous layer as its input and passes its output as the input to the next layer. The CNN
architecture consists of a combination of three types of layers: Convolution, max-pooling, and
classification. There are two types of layers in the low and middle-level of the network: Convolutional
layers and max-pooling layers. The even numbered layers are for convolutions and the odd-
numbered layers are for max-pooling operations. The output nodes of the convolution and max-
pooling layers are grouped into a 2D plane called feature mapping. Each plane of a layer is usually
derived from the combination of one or more planes of previous layers. The nodes of a plane are
connected to a small region of each connected planes of the previous layer. Each node of the
convolution layer extracts the features from the input images by convolution operations on the input
nodes.
Figure 9. The overall architecture of the Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) includes an input
layer, multiple alternating convolution and max-pooling layers, one fully-connected layer and one
classification layer.
Higher-level features are derived from features propagated from lower level layers. As the
features propagate to the highest layer or level, the dimensions of features are reduced depending on
the size of the kernel for the convolutional and max-pooling operations respectively. However, the
number of feature maps usually increased for representing better features of the input images for
ensuring classification accuracy. The output of the last layer of the CNN is used as the input to a fully
connected network which is called classification layer. Feed-forward neural networks have been used
as the classification layer as they have better performance [56,64]. In the classification layer, the
extracted features are taken as inputs with respect to the dimension of the weight matrix of the final
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 12 of 67
neural network. However, the fully connected layers are expensive in terms of network or learning
parameters. Nowadays, there are several new techniques, including average pooling and global
average pooling that is used as an alternative of fully-connected networks. The score of the respective
class is calculated in the top classification layer using a soft-max layer. Based on the highest score, the
classifier gives output for the corresponding classes. Mathematical details on different layers of
CNNs are discussed in the following section.
3.1.1. Convolutional Layer

In this layer, feature maps from previous layers are convolved with learnable kernels. The
output of the kernels goes through a linear or non-linear activation function, such as sigmoid,
hyperbolic tangent, Softmax, rectified linear, and identity functions) to form the output feature maps.
Each of the output feature maps can be combined with more than one input feature map. In general,
we have that
= ∗ + , (8)
where is the output of the current layer, is the previous layer output, is the kernel for
the present layer, and are the biases for the current layer. represents a selection of input maps.
For each output map, an additive bias is given. However, the input maps will be convolved with
distinct kernels to generate the corresponding output maps. The output maps finally go through a
linear or non-linear activation function (such as sigmoid, hyperbolic tangent, Softmax, rectified linear,
or identity functions).
3.1.2. Sub-sampling Layer

The subsampling layer performs the down sampled operation on the input maps. This is
commonly known as the pooling layer. In this layer, the number of input and output feature maps
does not change. For example, if there are input maps, then there will be exactly output maps.
Due to the down sampling operation, the size of each dimension of the output maps will be reduced,
depending on the size of the down sampling mask. For example, if a 2 × 2 down sampling kernel is
used, then each output dimension will be half of the corresponding input dimension for all the
images. This operation can be formulated as
x = down x , (9)
where down( . ) represents a sub-sampling function. Two types of operations are mostly performed
in this layer: Average pooling or max-pooling. In the case of the average pooling approach, the
function usually sums up over N × N patches of the feature maps from the previous layer and selects
the average value. On the other hand, in the case of max-pooling, the highest value is selected from
the N×N patches of the feature maps. Therefore, the output map dimensions are reduced by n times.
In some special cases, each output map is multiplied with a scalar. Some alternative sub-sampling
layers have been proposed, such as fractional max-pooling layer and sub-sampling with convolution.
These are explained in Section 4.6.
3.1.3. Classification Layer

This is the fully connected layer which computes the score of each class from the extracted
features from a convolutional layer in the preceding steps. The final layer feature maps are
represented as vectors with scalar values which are passed to the fully connected layers. The fully
connected feed-forward neural layers are used as a soft-max classification layer. There are no strict
rules on the number of layers which are incorporated in the network model. However, in most cases,
two to four layers have been observed in different architectures, including LeNet [55], AlexNet [7],
and VGG Net [9]. As the fully connected layers are expensive in terms of computation, alternative
approaches have been proposed during the last few years. These include the global average pooling
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 13 of 67
layer and the average pooling layer which help to reduce the number of parameters in the network
significantly.
In the backward propagation through the CNNs, the fully connected layer updates following
the general approach of fully connected neural networks (FCNN). The filters of the convolutional
layers are updated by performing the full convolutional operation on the feature maps between the
convolutional layer and its immediate previous layer. Figure 10 shows the basic operations in the
convolution and sub-sampling of an input image.
Figure 10. Feature maps after performing convolution and pooling operations.
3.1.4. Network Parameters and Required Memory for CNN

The number of computational parameters is an important metric to measure the complexity of
a deep learning model. The size of the output feature maps can be formulated as follows:
( − )
= + 1, (10)
where refers to the dimensions of the input feature maps, refers to the dimensions of the filters
or the receptive field, refers to the dimensions of output feature maps, and stands for the stride
length. Padding is typically applied during the convolution operations to ensure the input and output
feature map have the same dimensions. The amount of padding depends on the size of the kernel.
Equation 17 is used for determining the number of rows and columns for padding.
= ( − 1)/2, (11)
here is the amount of padding and refers to the dimension of the kernels. Several criteria are
considered for comparing the models. However, in most of the cases, the number of network
parameters and the total amount of memory are considered. The number of parameters ( ) of
layer is the calculated based on the following equation:
=( × × )× . (12)
If bias is added with the weights, then the above equation can be written as follows:
= ( × ( + 1) × )× , (13)
here the total number of parameters of lathe yer can be represented with , is for the total
number of output feature maps, and is the total number of input feature maps or channels.
For example, let’s assume the layer has = 32 input features maps, = 64 output
feature maps, and the filter size is = 5. In this case, the total number of parameters with a bias for
this layer: = (5 × 5 × 33) × 64 = 528,000. Thus, the amount of memory ( ) needs for the
operations of the layer can be expressed as
=( × × ). (14)
3.2. Popular CNN Architectures

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 14 of 67
In this section, several popular state-of-the-art CNN architectures will be examined. In general,
most deep convolutional neural networks are made of a key set of basic layers, including the
convolution layer, the sub-sampling layer, dense layers, and the soft-max layer. The architectures
typically consist of stacks of several convolutional layers and max-pooling layers followed by a fully
connected and SoftMax layers at the end. Some examples of such models are LeNet [55], AlexNet [7],
VGG Net [9], NiN [66] and all convolutional (All Conv) [67]. Other alternatives and more efficient
advanced architectures have been proposed, including DenseNet [68], FractalNet [69], GoogLeNet
with Inception units [10,70,71], and Residual Networks [11]. The basic building components
(convolution and pooling) are almost the same across these architectures. However, some topological
differences are observed in the modern deep learning architectures. Of the many DCNN
architectures, AlexNet [7], VGG [9], GoogLeNet [10,70,71], Dense CNN [68] and FractalNet [69] are
generally considered the most popular architectures because of their state-of-the-art performance on
different benchmarks for object recognition tasks. Among all of these structures, some of the
architectures are designed especially for large-scale data analysis (such as GoogLeNet and ResNet),
whereas the VGG network is considered a general architecture. Some of the architectures are dense
in terms of connectivity, such as DenseNet [68]. Fractal Network is an alternative of ResNet model.
3.2.1. LeNet (1998)

Although LeNet was proposed in the 1990s, limited computation capability and memory
capacity made the algorithm difficult to implement until about 2010 [55]. LeCun et al. [55], however,
proposed CNNs with the back-propagation algorithm and experimented on handwritten digit
dataset to achieve state-of-the-art accuracy. The proposed CNN architecture is well-known as LeNet-
5 [55]. The basic configuration of LeNet-5 is as follows (see Figure 11): Two convolutions (conv)
layers, two sub-sampling layers, two fully connected layers, and an output layer with the Gaussian
connection. The total number of weights and Multiply and Accumulates (MACs) are 431 k and 2.3
M, respectively.
As computational hardware started improving in capability, CNNs stated becoming popular as
an effective learning approach in the computer vision and machine learning communities.
Figure 11. The architecture of LeNet.
3.2.2. AlexNet (2012)

In 2012, Alex Krizhevesky and others proposed a deeper and wider CNN model compared to
LeNet and won the most difficult ImageNet challenge for visual object recognition called the
ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC) in 2012 [7]. AlexNet achieved state-of-
the-art recognition accuracy against all the traditional machine learning and computer vision
approaches. It was a significant breakthrough in the field of machine learning and computer vision
for visual recognition and classification tasks and is the point in history where interest in deep
learning increased rapidly.
The architecture of AlexNet is shown in Figure 12. The first convolutional layer performs
convolution and max-pooling with Local Response Normalization (LRN) where 96 different
receptive filters are used that are 11 × 11 in size. The max pooling operations are performed with 3 ×
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 15 of 67
3 filters with a stride size of 2. The same operations are performed in the second layer with 5 × 5
filters. 3 × 3 filters are used in the third, fourth, and fifth convolutional layers with 384, 384, and 296
feature maps respectively. Two fully connected (FC) layers are used with dropout followed by a
Softmax layer at the end. Two networks with similar structure and the same number of feature maps
are trained in parallel for this model. Two new concepts, Local Response Normalization (LRN) and
dropout, are introduced in this network. LRN can be applied in two different ways: First applying
on single channel or feature maps, where an N×N patch is selected from the same feature map and
normalized based on the neighborhood values. Second, LRN can be applied across the channels or
feature maps (neighborhood along the third dimension but a single pixel or location).
Figure 12. The architecture of AlexNet: Convolution, max-pooling, Local Response Normalization
(LRN) and fully connected (FC) layer.
AlexNet has three convolution layers and two fully connected layers. When processing the
ImageNet dataset, the total number of parameters for AlexNet can be calculated as follows for the
first layer: Input samples are 224×224×3, filters (kernels or masks) or a receptive field that has a size
11, the stride is 4, and the output of the first convolution layer is 55×55×96. According to the equations
in section 3.1.4, we can calculate that this first layer has 290400 (55×55×96) neurons and 364 (11 ×11×3
= 363 + 1 bias) weights. The parameters for the first convolution layer are 290400×364 = 105,705,600.
Table 2 shows the number of parameters for each layer in millions. The total number of weights and
MACs for the whole network are 61M and 724M, respectively.
3.2.3. ZFNet / Clarifai (2013)

In 2013, Matthew Zeiler and Rob Fergue won the 2013 ILSVRC with a CNN architecture which
was an extension of AlexNet. The network was called ZFNet [8], after the authors’ names. As CNNs
are expensive computationally, an optimum use of parameters is needed from a model complexity
point of view. The ZFNet architecture is an improvement of AlexNet, designed by tweaking the
network parameters of the latter. ZFNet uses 7x7 kernels instead of 11x11 kernels to significantly
reduce the number of weights. This reduces the number of network parameters dramatically and
improves overall recognition accuracy.
3.2.4. Network in Network (NiN)

This model is slightly different from the previous models where a couple of new concepts are
introduced [66]. The first concept is to use multilayer perception convolution, where convolutions
are performed with 1×1 filter that help to add more nonlinearity in the models. This helps to increase
the depth of the network, which can then be regularized with dropout. This concept is used often in
the bottleneck layer of a deep learning model.
The second concept is to use Global Average Pooling (GAP) as an alternative of fully connected
layers. This helps to reduce the number of network parameters significantly. GAP changes the
network structure significantly. By applying GAP on a large feature map, we can generate a final low
dimensional feature vector without reducing the dimension of the feature maps.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 16 of 67
3.2.5. VGGNET (2014)

The Visual Geometry Group (VGG), was the runner-up of the 2014 ILSVRC [9]. The main
contribution of this work is that it shows that the depth of a network is a critical component to achieve
better recognition or classification accuracy in CNNs. The VGG architecture consists of two
convolutional layers both of which use the ReLU activation function. Following the activation
function is a single max pooling layer and several fully connected layers also using a ReLU activation
function. The final layer of the model is a Softmax layer for classification. In VGG-E [9] the
convolution filter size is changed to a 3 × 3 filter with a stride of 2. Three VGG-E [9] models, VGG-11,
VGG-16, and VGG-19; were proposed the models had 11, 16, and 19 layers respectively. The VGG
network model is shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13. The basic building block of VGG network: Convolution (Conv) and FC for fully connected
layers.
All versions of the VGG-E models ended the same with three fully connected layers. However,
the number of convolution layers varied VGG-11 contained 8 convolution layers, VGG-16 had 13
convolution layers, and VGG-19 had 16 convolution layers. VGG-19, the most computational
expensive model, contained 138Mweights and had 15.5 M MACs.
3.2.6. GoogLeNet (2014)

GoogLeNet, the winner of ILSVRC 2014 [10], was a model proposed by Christian Szegedy of
Google with the objective of reducing computation complexity compared to the traditional CNN. The
proposed method was to incorporate Inception Layers that had variable receptive fields, which were
created by different kernel sizes. These receptive fields created operations that captured sparse
correlation patterns in the new feature map stack.
Figure 14. Inception layer: Naive version.
The initial concept of the Inception layer can be seen in Figure 14. GoogLeNet improved state-
of-the-art recognition accuracy using a stack of Inception layers, seen in Figure 15. The difference
between the naïve inception layer and final Inception Layer was the addition of 1x1 convolution
kernels. These kernels allowed for dimensionality reduction before computationally expensive
layers. GoogLeNet consisted of 22 layers in total, which was far greater than any network before it.
Later improved version of this network is proposed in [71]. However, the number of network
parameters GoogLeNet used was much lower than its predecessor AlexNet or VGG. GoogLeNet had
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 17 of 67
7M network parameters when AlexNet had 60M and VGG-19 138M. The computations for
GoogLeNet also were 1.53G MACs far lower than that of AlexNet or VGG.
Figure 15. Inception layer with dimension reduction.
3.2.7. Residual Network (ResNet in 2015)

The winner of ILSVRC 2015 was the Residual Network architecture, ResNet [11]. Resnet was
developed by Kaiming He with the intent of designing ultra-deep networks that did not suffer from
the vanishing gradient problem that predecessors had. ResNet is developed with many different
numbers of layers; 34, 50,101, 152, and even 1202. The popular ResNet50 contained 49 convolution
layers and 1 fully connected layer at the end of the network. The total number of weights and MACs
for the whole network are 25.5M and 3.9M respectively.
The basic block diagram of the ResNet architecture is shown in Figure 16. ResNet is a traditional
feedforward network with a residual connection. The output of a residual layer can be defined based
on the outputs of ( − 1) which comes from the previous layer defined as . ℱ( ) is the
output after performing various operations (e.g., convolution with different size of filters, Batch
Normalization (BN) followed by an activation function, such as a ReLU on ). The final output of
residualthe unit is which can be defined with the following equation:
= ℱ( )+ . (15)
Figure 16. Basic diagram of the Residual block.
The residual network consists of several basic residual blocks. However, the operations in the
residual block can be varied depending on the different architecture of residual networks [11]. The
wider version of the residual network was proposed by Zagoruvko el at. [72], another improved
residual network approach known as aggregated residual transformation [73]. Recently, some other
variants of residual models have been introduced based on the Residual Network architecture [74–
76]. Furthermore, there are several advanced architectures that are combined with Inception and
Residual units. The basic conceptual diagram of Inception-Residual unit is shown in the following
Figure 17.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 18 of 67
Figure 17. The basic block diagram for Inception Residual unit.
Mathematically, this concept can be represented as

× ×
= ℱ( ⨀ )+ , (16)
where the symbol ⨀ refers the concentration operations between two outputs from the 3×3 and 5×5
filters. After that, the convolution operation is performed with 1×1 filters. Finally, the outputs are
added with the inputs of this block of . The concept of Inception block with residual connections
is introduced in the Inception-v4 architecture [71]. The improved version of the Inception-Residual
network were also proposed [76,77].
3.2.8. Densely Connected Network (DenseNet)

DenseNet developed by Gao et al. in 2017 [68], which consists of densely connected CNN layers,
the outputs of each layer are connected with all successor layers in a dense block [68]. Therefore, it is
formed with dense connectivity between the layers rewarding it the name DenseNet. This concept is
efficient for feature reuse, which dramatically reduces network parameters. DenseNet consists of
several dense blocks and transition blocks, which are placed between two adjacent dense blocks. The
conceptual diagram of a dense block is shown in Figure 18.
Figure 18. A 4-layer Dense block with a growth rate of = 3.
Each layer takes all the preceding feature maps as input. When deconstructing Figure 19, the
layer received all the feature maps from previous layers of , , ⋯ as input:
= ([ , , ⋯ ]), (17)
where[ , , ⋯ ] are the concatenated features for layers 0, ⋯ ⋯ , − 1 and (∙) is considered
as a single tensor. It performs three different consecutive operations: Batch-Normalization (BN) [78],
followed by a ReLU [70] and a 3 × 3 convolution operation. In the transaction block, 1 × 1
convolutional operations are performed with BN followed by a 2 × 2 average pooling layer. This
new model shows state-of-the-art accuracy with a reasonable number of network parameters for
object recognitions tasks.
3.2.9. FractalNet (2016)

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 19 of 67
This architecture is an advanced and alternative architecture of ResNet model, which is efficient
for designing large models with nominal depth, but shorter paths for the propagation of gradient
during training [69]. This concept is based on drop-path which is another regularization approach
for making large networks. As a result, this concept helps to enforce speed versus accuracy tradeoffs.
The basic block diagram of FractalNet is shown in Figure 19.
Figure 19. The detailed FractalNet module on the left and FractalNet on the right.
3.3. CapsuleNet
CNNs are an effective methodology for detecting features of an object and achieving good
recognition performance compared to state-of-the-art handcrafted feature detectors. There are limits
to CNNs, which are that it does not take into account special relationships, perspective, size, and
orientation, of features. For example, if you have a face image, it does not matter the placement of
different components (nose, eye, mouth, etc.) of the faces neurons of a CNN will wrongly active and
recognition as a face without considering special relationships (orientation, size). Now, imagine a
neuron which contains the likelihood with properties of features (perspective, orientation, size etc.).
This special type of neurons, capsules, can detect face efficiently with distinct information. The
capsule network consists of several layers of capsule nodes. The first version of capsule network
(CapsNet) consisted of three layers of capsule nodes in an encoding unit.
This architecture for MNIST (28×28) images, the 256 9×9 kernels are applied with a stride 1, so
the output is (28 − 9 + 1 = 20) with 256 feature maps. Then the outputs are fed to the primary
capsule layer which is a modified convolution layer that generates an 8-D vector instead of a scalar.
In the first convolutional layer, 9×9 kernels are applied with stride 2, the output dimension is
((20 − 9)/2 + 1 = 6). The primary capsules are used 8×32 kernels which generates 32×8×6×6 (32
groups for 8 neurons with 6×6 size).
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 20 of 67
Figure 20. A CapsNet encoding unit with 3 layers. The instance of each class is represented with a
vector of a capsule in DigitCaps layer that is used for calculating classification loss. The weights
between the primary capsule layer and DigitCaps layer are represented with .
The entire encoding and decoding processes of CapsNet is shown in Figures 20 and 21,
respectively. We used a max-pooling layer in CNN often that can handle translation variance. Even
if a feature moves if it is still under a max pooling window it can be detected. As the capsule contains
the weighted sum of features from the previous layer, therefore this approach is capable of detecting
overlapped features which is important for segmentation and detection tasks.
Figure 21. The decoding unit where a digit is reconstructed from DigitCaps layer representation. The
Euclidean distance is used minimizing the error between the input sample and the reconstructed
sample from the sigmoid layer. True labels are used for reconstruction target during training.
In the traditional CNN, a single cost function is used to evaluate the overall error which
propagates backward during training. However, in this case, if the weight between two neurons is
zero, then the activation of a neuron is not propagated from that neuron. The signal is routed with
respect to the feature parameters rather than a one size fits all cost function in iterative dynamic
routing with the agreement. For details about this architecture, please see Reference [79]. This new
CNN architecture provides state-of-the-art accuracy for handwritten digit recognition on MNIST.
However, from an application point of view, this architecture is more suitable for segmentation and
detection tasks compare to classification tasks.
3.4. Comparison of Different Models
The comparison of recently proposed models based on error, network parameters, and a
maximum number of connections are given in Table 2.
Table 2. The top-5% errors with computational parameters and macs for different deep CNN models.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 21 of 67
LeNet-5 AlexNet OverFeat VGG-16 GoogLeNet ResNet-

Methods
[54] [7] (fast) [8] [9] [10] 50(v1) [11]
Top-5 errors n/a 16.4 14.2 7.4 6.7 5.3
Input size 28 × 28 227 × 227 231 × 231 224 × 224 224 × 224 224 × 224
Number of Conv Layers 2 5 5 16 21 50
Filter Size 5 3,5,11 3,7 3 1,3,5,7 1,3,7
Number of Feature Maps 1,6 3–256 3–1024 3–512 3–1024 3–1024
Stride 1 1,4 1,4 1 1,2 1,2
Number of Weights 26 k 2.3 M 16 M 14.7 M 6.0 M 23.5 M
Number of MACs 1.9 M 666 M 2.67 G 15.3 G 1.43 G 3.86 G
Number of FC layers 2 3 3 3 1 1
Number of Weights 406 k 58.6 M 130 M 124 M 1M 1M
Number of MACs 405 k 58.6 M 130 M 124 M 1M 1M
Total Weights 431 k 61 M 146 M 138 M 7M 25.5 M
Total MACs 2.3 M 724 M 2.8 G 15.5 G 1.43 G 3.9 G
3.5. Other DNN Models

There are many other network architectures, such as fast region-based CNN [80] and Xception
[81], which are popular in the computer vision community. In 2015 a new model was proposed using
recurrent convolution layers named Recurrent Convolution Neural Network or RCNN [82]. The
improved version of this network is a combination of the two most popular architectures in the
Inception network and Recurrent Convolutional Network, Inception Convolutional Recurrent
Neural Networks (IRCNN) [83]. IRCNN provided better accuracy compared RCNN and inception
network with almost identical network parameters. Visual Phase Guided CNN (ViP CNN) is
proposed with phase guided message passing a structure (PMPS) to build connections between
relational components, which show better speed up and recognition accuracy [84]. Look up based
CNN [85] is a fast, compact, and accurate model enabling efficient inference. In 2016 the architecture
known as a fully convolutional network (FCN) was proposed for segmentation tasks where it is now
commonly used in [27]. Other recently proposed CNN models include pixel net [86], a deep network
with stochastic depth, deeply-supervised networks, and ladder network [87–89]. Additional, CNN
architecture models are explained in [90]. Some articles are published on do deep nets really need to
be deep [91–93]. There are some articles published on fitNet hits [94], initialization method [95], deep
versus wide net [96], training on DL on large training set [97], graph processing [98], energy efficient
network architectures [99,100].
3.6. Applications of CNNs
3.6.1. CNNs for Solving A Graph Problem

Learning graph data structures is a common problem with various applications in data mining
and machine learning tasks. DL techniques have made a bridge in between the machine learning and
data mining groups. An efficient CNN for arbitrary graph processing was proposed in 2016 [101].
3.6.2. Image Processing and Computer Vision

Most of the models, we have discussed above are applied to different application domains,
including image classification [7–11], detection, segmentation, localization, captioning, video
classification and many more. There is a good survey on DL approaches for image processing and
computer vision related tasks, including image classification, segmentation, and detection [102]. For
examples, single image super-resolution using CNN method [103], image denoising using block-
matching CNN [104], photo aesthetic assessment using A-Lamp (Adaptive Layout-Aware Multi-
Patch Deep CNN) [105], DCNN for hyperspectral imaging segmentation [106], image registration
[107], fast artistic style transfer [108], image background segmentation using DCNN [109],
handwritten character recognition [110], optical image classification [111], crop mapping using high-
resolution satellite imagery [112], object recognition with cellular simultaneous recurrent networks
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 22 of 67
and CNN [113]. The DL approaches are massively applied to human activity recognition tasks and
achieved state-of-the-art performance compared to exiting approaches [114–119]. However, the state-
of-the-art models for classification, segmentation and detection task are listed as follows:
(1) Models for classification problems: according to the architecture of classification models, the
input images are encoded different step with convolution and subsampling layers and finally the
SoftMax approach is used to calculate class probability. Most of the models have discussed above are
applied to the classification problem. However, these model with classification layer can be used as
feature extraction for segmentation and detection tasks. The list of the classification models are as
follows: AlexNet [55], VGGNet [9], GoogleNet [10], ResNet [11], DenseNet [68], FractalNet [69],
CapsuleNet [79], IRCNN [83], IRRCNN [77], DCRN [120] and so on.
(2) Models for segmentation problems: there are several semantic segmentation models have been
proposed in the last few years. The segmentation model consists of two units: Encoding and decoding
units. In the encoding unit, the convolution and subsampling operations are performed to encode to
the lower dimensional latent space where as the decoding unit decodes the image from latent space
performing deconvolution and up-sampling operation. The very first segmentation model is Fully
Convolutional Network (FCN) [27,121]. Later the improved version of this network is proposed
which is named as SegNet [122]. There are several new models have proposed recently which
includes RefineNet [123], PSPNEt [124], DeepLab [125], UNet [126], and R2U-Net [127].
(3) Models for detection problems: the detection problem is a bit different compared to classification
and segmentation problems. In this case, the model goal is to identify target types with its
corresponding position. The model answers two questions: What is the object (classification
problem)? and where the object (regression problem)? To achieve these goals, two losses are
calculated for classification and regression unit in top of the feature extraction module and the model
weights are updated with respect to the both loses. For the very first time, Region based CNN
(RCNN) is proposed for object detection task [128]. Recently, there are some better detection
approaches have been proposed, including focal loss for dense object detector [129], Later the
different improved version of this network is proposed called faster RCNN, fast RCNN [80,130].
mask R-CNN [131], You only look once (YOLO) [132], SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detector [133] and
UD-Net for tissue detection from pathological images [120].
3.6.3. Speech Processing

CNNs are also applied to speech processing, such as speech enhancement using multimodal
deep CNN [134], and audio tagging using Convolutional Gated Recurrent Network (CGRN) [135].
3.6.4. CNN for Medical Imaging

Litjens et al [136] provided a good survey on DL for medical image processing, including
classification, detection, and segmentation tasks. Several popular DL methods were developed for
medical image analysis. For instance, MDNet was developed for medical diagnosis using images and
corresponding text description [137], cardiac Segmentation using short-Axis MRI [138], segmentation
of optic disc and retinal vasculature using CNN [139], brain tumor segmentation using random
forests with features learned with fully convolutional neural network (FCNN) [140]. These
techniques have been applied in the field of computational pathology and achieved state-of-the-art
performance [28,29,120,141].
4. Advanced Training Techniques

The advanced training techniques or components which need to be considered carefully for
efficient training of DL approach. There are different advanced techniques to apply for training a
deep learning model better. The techniques, including input pre-processing, a better initialization
method, batch normalization, alternative convolutional approaches, advanced activation functions,
alternative pooling techniques, network regularization approaches, and better optimization method
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 23 of 67
for training. The following sections are discussed on individual advanced training techniques
individually.
4.1. Preparing Dataset

Presently different approaches have been applied before feeding the data to the network. The
different operations to prepare a dataset are as follows; sample rescaling, mean subtraction, random
cropping, flipping data with respect to the horizon or vertical axis, color jittering, PCA/ZCA
whitening and many more.
4.2. Network Initialization

The initialization of deep networks has a big impact on the overall recognition accuracy [59,60].
Previously, most of the networks have been initialized with random weights. For complex tasks with
high dimensionality data training, a DNN becomes difficult because weights should not be
symmetrical due to the back-propagation process. Therefore, effective initialization techniques are
important for training this type of DNN. However, there are many effective techniques that have
been proposed during the last few years. LeCun [142] and Bengio [143] proposed a simple but
effective approach. In their method, the weights are scaled by the inverse of the square root of the
number of input neurons of the layer, which can be stated 1⁄ , where is the number of input
neurons of layer. The deep network initialization approach of Xavier has been proposed based on
the symmetric activation function with respect to the hypothesis of linearity. This approach is known
as Xavier initialization approach. Recently, Dmytro M. et al. [95] proposed Layer-sequential unit-
invariance (LSUV), which is a data-driven initialization approach and provides good recognition
accuracy on several benchmark datasets, including ImageNet. One of the popular initialization
approaches has proposed by He et al. in 2015 [144]. The distribution of the weights of lth layer will be
a normal distribution with mean zero and variance which can be expressed as follows:
2
~ 0, . (18)
4.3. Batch Normalization

Batch normalization helps accelerate DL processes by reducing internal covariance by shifting
input samples. What that means is the inputs are linearly transformed to have zero mean and unit
variance. For whitened inputs, the network converges faster and shows better regularization during
training, which has an impact on the overall accuracy. Since the data whitening is performed outside
of the network, there is no impact of whitening during training of the model. In the case of deep
recurrent neural networks, the inputs of the nth layer are the combination of n-1th layer, which is not
raw feature inputs. As the training progresses the effect of normalization or whitening reduces
respectively, which causes the vanishing gradient problem. This can slow down the entire training
process and cause saturation. To better training process, batch normalization is then applied to the
internal layers of the deep neural network. This approach ensures faster convergence in theory and
during an experiment on benchmarks. In batch normalization, the features of a layer are
independently normalized with mean zero and variance one [78,145,146]. The algorithm of Batch
normalization is given in Algorithm I.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 24 of 67
Algorithm I: Batch Normalization (BN)

Inputs: Values of x over a mini-batch: ={ , , ……, }
Outputs: y = BN , (x )
μ ← ∑ x // mini-batch mean
← ∑ ( − ) // mini-batch variance
← // normalize
∈
= + ≡ BN , (x ) // Scaling and shifting
The parameters and are used for the scale and shift factor for the normalization values, so
normalization does not only depend on layer values. If you use normalization techniques, the
following criterions are recommended to consider during implementation:
 Increase the learning rate
 Dropout (batch normalization does the same job)
 L2 weight regularization
 Accelerating the learning rate decay
 Remove Local Response Normalization (LRN) (if you used it)
 Shuffle training sample more thoroughly
 Useless distortion of images in the training set
4.4. Alternative Convolutional Methods

Alternative and computationally efficient convolutional techniques that reduce the cost of
multiplications by a factor of 2.5 have been proposed [147].
4.5. Activation Function

The traditional Sigmoid and Tanh activation functions have been used for implementing neural
network approaches in the past few decades. The graphical and mathematical representation is
shown in Figure 22.
(a) (b)
Figure 22. Activation function: (a) Sigmoid function, and (b) hyperbolic transient.
Sigmoid:
1
= . (19)
1+
Tanh:
−
= . (20)
+
The popular activation function called Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU) proposed in 2010 solves the
vanishing gradient problem for training deep learning approaches. The basic concept is simple to
keep all the values above zero and sets all negative values to zero that is shown in Figure 23 [64]. The
ReLU activation was first used in AlexNet [7].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 25 of 67
Figure 23. Pictorial representation of Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU).
Mathematically we can express ReLU as follows:
= max(0, ). (21)
As the activation function plays a crucial role in learning the weights for deep architectures.
Many researchers focus here because there is much that can be done in this area. Meanwhile, there
are several improved versions of ReLU that have been proposed, which provide even better accuracy
compared to the ReLU activation function shown in Figure 24. An efficient improved version of ReLU
activation function is called the parametric ReLU (PReLU) proposed by Kaiming He et al. in 2015.
Figure 25 shows the pictorial representation of Leaky ReLU and ELU activation functions. This
technique can automatically learn the parameters adaptively and improve the accuracy at negligible
extra computing cost [144].
(a) (b)
Figure 24. Diagram for (a) Leaky ReLU (Rectified Linear Unit), and (b) Exponential Linear Unit (ELU).
Leaky ReLU:
= max( , ). (22)
here is a constant, the value is 0.1.
ELU:
, ≥0
= . (23)
( − 1), <0
The recent proposal of the Exponential Linear Unit activation function, which allowed for a
faster and more accurate version of the DCNN structure [148]. Furthermore, tuning the negative part
of activation function creates the leaky ReLU with Multiple Exponent Linear Unit (MELU) that are
proposed recently [149]. S shape Rectified Linear Activation units are proposed in 2015 [150]. A
survey on modern activation functions was conducted in 2015 [151].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 26 of 67
Figure 25. Average and max-pooling operations.
4.6. Sub-Sampling Layer or Pooling Layer

At present, two different techniques have been used for the implementation of deep networks
in the sub-sampling or pooling layer: Average and max-pooling. The concept of average pooling layer
was used for the first time in LeNet [55] and AlexNet used Max-pooling layers instead of in 2012[7].
The conceptual diagram for max pooling and average pooling operation are shown in Figure 25. The
concept of special pyramid pooling has been proposed by He et al. in 2014, which is shown in Figure
26 [152].
The multi-scale pyramid pooling was proposed in 2015 [153]. In 2015, Benjamin G. proposed a
new architecture with Fractional max pooling, which provides state-of-the-art classification accuracy
for CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 datasets. This structure generalizes the network by considering two
important properties for a sub-sampling layer or pooling layer. First, the non-overlapped max-
pooling layer limits the generalize of the deep structure of the network, this paper proposed a
network with 3x3 overlapped max-pooling with 2-stride instead of 22 as sub-sampling layer [154].
Another paper which has conducted research on different types of pooling approaches, including
mixed, gated, and tree as a generalization of pooling functions [155].
Figure 26. Spatial pyramid pooling.
4.7. Regularization Approaches for DL

There are different regularization approaches that have been proposed in the past few years for
deep CNN. The simplest but efficient approach called dropout was proposed by Hinton in 2012 [156].
In Dropout, a randomly selected subset of activations is set to zero within a layer [157]. The dropout
concept is shown in Figure 27.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 27 of 67
Figure 27. Pictorial representation of the concept Dropout.
Another regularization approach is called Drop Connect. In this case, instead of dropping the
activation, the subset of weights within the network layers are set to zero. As a result, each layer
receives the randomly selected subset of units from the immediate previous layer [158]. Some other
regularization approaches are proposed as well [159].
4.8. Optimization Methods for DL

There are different optimization methods, such as SGD, Adagrad, AdaDelta, RMSprop, and
Adam [160]. Some activation functions have been improved upon, such as in the case of SGD where
it was proposed with an added variable momentum, which improved training and testing accuracy.
In the case of Adagrad, the main contribution was to calculate adaptive learning rate during training.
For this method, the summation of the magnitude of the gradient is considered to calculate the
adaptive learning rate. In the case with a large number of epochs, the summation of the magnitude
of the gradient becomes large. The result of this is the learning rate decreases radically, which causes
the gradient to approach zero quickly. The main drawback of this approach is that it causes problems
during training. Later, RMSprop was proposed considering only the magnitude of the gradient of the
immediately previous iteration, which prevents the problems with Adagrad and provides better
performance in some cases. The Adam optimization approach is proposed based on the momentum
and the magnitude of the gradient for calculating adaptive learning rate similar RMSprop. Adam has
improved overall accuracy and helps for efficient training with the better convergence of deep
learning algorithms [161]. The improved version of the Adam optimization approach has been
proposed recently, which is called EVE. EVE provides even better performance with fast and accurate
convergence [162].
5. Recurrent Neural Network (RNN)
5.1. Introduction
Human thoughts have persistence; Human don’t throw a thing away and start their thinking
from scratch in a second. As you are reading this article, you understand each word or sentence based
on the understanding of previous words or sentences. The traditional neural network approaches,
including DNNs and CNNs cannot deal with this type of problem. The standard Neural Networks
and CNN are incapable due to the following reasons. First, these approaches only handle a fixed-size
vector as input (e.g., an image or video frame) and produce a fixed-size vector as output (e.g.,
probabilities of different classes). Second, those models operate with a fixed number of computational
steps (e.g., the number of layers in the model). The RNNs are unique as they allow operation over a
sequence of vectors over time. The Hopfield Newark introduced this concept in 1982 but the idea was
described shortly in 1974 [163]. The pictorial representation is shown in Figure 28.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 28 of 67
Figure 28. The structure of basic Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) with a loop.
Different versions of RNN have been proposed in Jordan and Elman [164,165]. In the Elman, the
architecture uses the output from hidden layers as inputs alongside the normal inputs of hidden
layers [129]. On the other hand, the outputs from the output unit are used as inputs with the inputs
of the hidden layer in Jordan network [130]. Jordan, in contrast, uses inputs from the outputs of the
output unit with the inputs to the hidden layer. Mathematically expressed as:
Elman network [1164]:
h = σ (w x + u h + b ), (24)
y =σ w h +b . (25)
Jordan network [165]:
h = σ (w x + u y + b ), (26)
y =σ w h +b , (27)
where x is a vector of inputs, h are hidden layer vectors, y are the output vectors, w and u are
weight matrices and b is the bias vector.
A loop allows information to be passed from one step of the network to the next. A recurrent
neural network can be thought of as multiple copies of the same network, each network passing a
message to a successor. The diagram below Figure 29 shows what happens if we unroll the loop.
Figure 29. An unrolled RNNs.
The main problem with RNN approaches is that there exists the vanishing gradient problem.
For the first time, this problem is solved by Hochreiter et al. [166]. A deep RNN consisting of 1000
subsequent layers was implemented and evaluated to solve deep learning tasks in 1993 [167]. There
are several solutions that have been proposed for solving the vanishing gradient problem of RNN
approaches in the past few decades. Two possible effective solutions to this problem are first to clip
the gradient and scale the gradient if the norm is too large, and secondly, create a better RNN model.
One of the better models was introduced by Felix A. el at. in 2000 named Long Short-Term Memory
(LSTM) [168,169]. From the LSTM there have been different advanced approaches proposed in the
last few years which are explained in the following sections. The diagram for LSTM is shown in
Figure 30.
The RNN approaches allowed sequences in the input, the output, or in the most general case
both. For example, DL for text mining, building deep learning models on textual data requires
representation of the basic text unit and word. Neural network structures that can hierarchically
capture the sequential nature of the text. In most of these cases, RNNs or Recursive Neural Networks
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 29 of 67
are used for language understanding [170]. In the language modeling, it tries to predict the next word
or set of words or some cases sentences based on the previous ones [171]. RNNs are networks with
loops in them, allowing information to persist. Another example: The RNNs are able to connect
previous information to the present task: Using previous video frames, understanding the present
and trying to generate future frames as well [172].
Figure 30. Diagram for Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM).
5.2. Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM)

The key idea of LSTMs is the cell state, the horizontal line running through the top of Figure 31.
LSTMs remove or add information to the cell state called gates: An input gate (i ), forget gate (f )
and output gate (o ) can be defined as:
f = σ(W . [h , x ] + b ), (28)
i = σ(W . [h , x ] + b ), (29)
C = tanh(W . [h , x ] + b ), (30)
C =f ∗C +i ∗ C , (31)
O = σ(W . [h , x ] + b ), (32)
h = O ∗ tanh(C ). (33)
LSTM models are popular for temporal information processing. Most of the papers that include
LSTM models with some minor variance. Some of them are discussed in the following section. There
is a slightly modified version of the network with peephole connections by Gers and Schimidhuber
proposed in 2000 [168]. The concept of peepholes is included with almost all the gated in this model.
Figure 31. Diagram for Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU).
5.3. Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU)

GRU also came from LSTMs with slightly more variation [173]. GRUs are now popular in the
community who are working with recurrent networks. The main reason for the popularity is the
computation cost and simplicity of the model, which is shown in Figure 31. GRUs are lighter versions
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 30 of 67
of RNN approaches than standard LSTM in term of topology, computation cost and complexity [173].
This technique combines the forget and input gates into a single update gate and merges the cell state
and hidden state along with some other changes. The simpler model of the GRU has been growing
increasingly popular. Mathematically the GRU can be expressed with the following equations:
z = σ(W . [h , x ]), (34)
r = σ(W . [h , x ]), (35)
h = tanh(W. [r ∗ h , x ]), (36)
h = (1 − z ) ∗ h +z ∗ h . (37)
The question is which one is the best? According to the different empirical studies, there is no
clear evidence of a winner. However, the GRU requires fewer network parameters, which makes the
model faster. On the other hand, LSTM provides better performance, if you have enough data and
computational power [174]. There is a variant LSTM named Deep LSTM [175]. Another variant that
is a bit different approach called A clockwork RNN [176]. There is an important empirical evaluation
on a different version of RNN approaches, including LSTM by Greff, et al. in 2015 [177] and the final
conclusion was all the LSTM variants were all about the same [177]. Another empirical evaluation is
conducted on thousands of RNN architecture, including LSTM, GRU and so on finding some that
worked better than LSTMs on certain tasks [178]
5.4. Convolutional LSTM (ConvLSTM)

The problem with fully connected (FC) LSTM and short FC-LSTM model is handling
spatiotemporal data and its usage of full connections in the input-to-state and state-to-state
transactions, where no spatial information has been encoded. The internal gates of ConvLSTM are
3D tensors, where the last two dimensions are spatial dimensions (rows and columns). The
ConvLSTM determines the future state of a certain cell in the grid with respect to inputs and the past
states of its local neighbors which can be achieved using convolution operations in the state-to-state
or inputs-to-states transition, shown in Figure 32.
Figure 32. Pictorial diagram for ConvLSTM.
ConvLSTM is providing good performance for temporal data analysis with video datasets [172].
Mathematically the ConvLSTM is expressed as follows where * represents the convolution operation
and ∘ denotes for Hadamard product:
i = σ(w . +w ∗ℋ +w ∘ + b ), (38)
f = σ(w . +w ∗ℋ +w ∘ + b ), (39)
C = tanh(w . +w ∗ℋ + b ), (40)
C = f ∘C +i ∗C , (41)
o = σ(w . +w ∗ℋ +w ∘ +b , (42)
h = o ∘ tanh(C ). (43)
5.5. A variant of Architectures of RNN with Respective to the Applications

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 31 of 67
To incorporate the attention mechanism with RNNs, Word2Vec is used in most of the cases for
a word or sentence encoding. Word2vec is a powerful word embedding technique with a 2-layer
predictive NN from raw text inputs. This approach is used in the different fields of applications,
including unsupervised learning with words, relationship learning between the different words, the
ability to abstract higher meaning of the words based on the similarity, sentence modeling, language
understanding and many more. There are different other word embedding approaches that have
been proposed in the past few years which are used to solve difficult tasks and provide state-of-the-
art performance, including machine translation and language modeling, Image and video captioning
and time series data analysis [179–181].
From the application point of view, RNNs can solve different types of problems which need
different architectures of RNNs, shown in Figure 33. In Figure 33, Input vectors are represented as
green, RNN states are represented with blue and orange represents the output vector. These
structures can be described as:
One to One: Standard mode for classification without RNN (e.g., image classification problem)
shown Figure 33(a)
Many to One: Sequence of inputs and a single output (e.g., the sentiment analysis where inputs
are a set of sentences or words and output is a positive or negative expression) shown Figure 33b.
One to Many: Where a system takes an input and produces a sequence of outputs (Image
Captioning problem: Input is a single image and output is a set of words with context) shown Figure
33c.
Many to Many: Sequences of inputs and outputs (e.g., machine translation: machine takes a
sequence of words from English and translates to a sequence of words in French) shown Figure 33d.
Many to Many: Sequence to sequence learning (e.g., video classification problem in which we
take video frames as input and wish to label each frame of the video shown Figure 33e.
(a) (b) (c)
(d) (e)
Figure 33. The different structure of RNN with respect to the applications: (a) One to one; (b) many
to one; (c) one to many; (d) many to many; and (e) many to many.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 32 of 67
5.6. Attention-based Models with RNN

Different attention-based models have been proposed using RNN approaches. The first initiative
for RNNs with the attention that automatically learns to describe the content of images is proposed
by Xu, et al. in 2015 [182]. A dual state attention based RNN is proposed for effective time series
prediction [183]. Another difficult task is Visual Question Answering (VQA) using GRUs where the
inputs are an image and a natural language question about the image, the task is to provide an
accurate natural language answer. The output is to be conditional on both image and textual inputs.
A CNN is used to encode the image and an RNN is implemented to encode the sentence [184].
Another outstanding concept is released from Google called Pixel Recurrent Neural Networks (Pixel
RNN). This approach provides state-of-the-art performance for image completion tasks [185]. The
new model called residual RNN is proposed, where the RNN is introduced with an effective residual
connection in a deep recurrent network [186].
5.7. RNN Applications

RNNs, including LSTM and GRU, are applied to Tensor processing [187]. Natural Language
Processing using RNN techniques, including LSTMs and GRUs [188,189]. Convolutional RNNs based
on multi-language identification system has been proposed in 2017 [190]. Time series data analysis
using RNNs [191]. Recently, TimeNet was proposed based on pre-trained deep RNNs for time series
classification (TSC) [192]. Speech and audio processing, including LSTMs for large-scale acoustic
modeling [193,194]. Sound event prediction using convolutional RNNs [195]. Audio tagging using
Convolutional GRUs [196]. Early heart failure detection is proposed using RNNs [197].
RNNs are applied in tracking and monitoring: Data-driven traffic forecasting systems are
proposed using Graph Convolutional RNN (GCRNN) [25]. An LSTM based network traffic
prediction system is proposed with a neural network-based model [198]. Bidirectional Deep RNN is
applied to driver action prediction [199]. Vehicle Trajectory prediction using an RNN [200]. Action
recognition using an RNN with a Bag-of-Words [201]. Collection anomaly detection using LSTMs for
cybersecurity [202].
6. Auto-Encoder (AE) and Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM)

This section will be discussing one of the unsupervised deep learning approaches the Auto
Encoder [61] (e.g., variational auto-encoder (VAE) [203], denoising AE [65], sparse AE [204], stacked
denoising AE [205], Split-Brain AE [206]). The applications of different AE are also discussed at the
end of this chapter.
6.1. Review of Auto-Encoder (AE)

An AE is a deep neural network approach used for unsupervised feature learning with efficient
data encoding and decoding. The main objective of autoencoder is to learn and represent (encoding)
of the input data, typically for data dimensionality reduction, compression, fusion and many more.
This autoencoder technique consists of two parts: The encoder and the decoder. In the encoding
phase, the input samples are mapped usually in the lower dimensional features space with a
constructive feature representation. This approach can be repeated until the desired feature
dimensional space is reached. Whereas in the decoding phase, we regenerate actual features from
lower dimensional features with reverse processing. The conceptual diagram of auto-encoder with
encoding and decoding phases is shown in Figure 34.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 33 of 67
Figure 34. Diagram for Auto encoder.
The encoder and decoder transition can be represented with ∅ and , ∅∶ → ℱ and ∶ ℱ→
, then
∅, = ∅, ‖ − (∅, ) ‖ . (44)
If we consider a simple autoencoder with one hidden layer, where the input is ∈ℝ = ,
which is mapped onto ∈ ℝ = ℱ, it can be then expressed as follows:
= ( + ), (45)
where W is the weight matrix and b is bias. represents an element wise activation function, such
as a sigmoid or a rectified linear unit (RLU). Let us consider is again mapped or reconstructed onto
which is the same dimension of . The reconstruction can be expressed as
= ( + ). (46)
This model is trained with minimizing the reconstruction errors, which is defined as loss
function as follows
ℒ( , )=‖ − ‖ = − ( + ) + . (47)
Usually, the feature space of ℱ has lower dimensions than the input feature space , which
can be considered as the compressed representation of the input sample. In the case of multilayer
auto encoder, the same operation will be repeated as required with in the encoding and decoding
phases. A deep Auto encoder is constructed by extending the encoder and decoder with multiple
hidden layers. The Gradient vanishing problem is still a big issue with the deeper model of AE: The
gradient becomes too small as it passes back through many layers of an AE model. Different
advanced AE models are discussed in the following sections.
6.2. Variational Autoencoders (VAEs)

There are some limitations of using simple Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) which are
discussed in Section 7. At first, images are generated using GAN from input noise. If someone wants
to generate a specific image, then it is difficult to select the specific features (noise) randomly to
produce desired images. It requires searching the entire distribution. Second, GANs differentiate
between ‘real’ and ‘fake’ objects. For example, if you want to generate a dog, there is no constraint
that the dog must look like a dog. Therefore, it produces same style images which the style looks like
a dog but if we closely observed then it is not exactly. However, VAE is proposed to overcome those
limitations of basic GANs, where the latent vector space is used to represent the images which follow
a unit Gaussian distribution [203,207]. The conceptual diagram for VAE is shown in Figure 35.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 34 of 67
Figure 35. Variational Auto-Encoder.
In this model, there are two losses, one is a mean squared error that determines, how good the
network is doing for reconstructing the image, and loss (the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence) of
latent, which determines how closely the latent variable match is with unit Gaussian distribution. For
example, suppose is an input and the hidden representation is z. The parameters (weights and
biases) are . For reconstructing the phase the input is and the desired output is . The
parameters (weights and biases) are . So, we can represent the encoder as ( | ) and decoder
( | ) respectively. The loss function of both networks and latent space can be represented as
( , )=− ~ ( | ) ( | ) + ( | )| ( ) . (48)
6.3. Split-Brain Autoencoder

Recently Split-Brain AE was proposed from Berkeley AI Research (BAIR) lab, which is the
architectural modification of traditional autoencoders for unsupervised representation learning. In
this architecture, the network is split into disjoint sub-networks, where two networks try to predict
the feature representation of an entire image [206]. The following Figure 36 shows the concept of
split-Brain Autoencoder.
Figure 36. Split-Brain Autoencoder.
6.4. Applications of AE
AE is applied in Bio-informatics [136,208] and cybersecurity [209]. We can apply AE for
unsupervised feature extraction and then apply Winner Take All (WTA) for clustering those samples
for generating labels [210]. AE has been used as an encoding and decoding technique with or for
other deep learning approaches, including CNN, DNN, RNN, and RL in the last decade. However,
here are some other approaches recently published [207,211]
6.5. Review of RBM

Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) is another unsupervised deep learning approach. The
training phase can be modeled using a two-layer network called a Restricted Boltzmann Machine
[212] in which stochastic binary pixels are connected to stochastic binary feature detectors using
symmetrically weighted connections. RBM is an energy-based undirected generative model that uses
a layer of hidden variables to model distribution over visible variables. The undirected model for the
interactions between the hidden and visible variables is used to ensure that the contribution of the
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 35 of 67
likelihood term to the posterior over the hidden variables is approximately factorial which greatly
facilitates inference [213]. The conceptual diagram of RBM is shown in Figure 37.
Figure 37. Block diagram for Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM).
Energy-based models mean that the probability distribution over the variables of interest is
defined through an energy function. The energy function is composed from a set of observable
variables s = { } and a set of hidden variables = {ℎ } , where i is a node in the visible layer, j is a
node in the hidden layer. It is restricted in the sense that there are no visible-visible or hidden-hidden
connections. The values corresponding to visible units of the RBM because their states are observed;
the feature detectors correspond to hidden units. A joint configuration, (v,h) of the visible and hidden
units has an energy (Hopfield, 1982) given by:
( , ℎ) = − − ℎ − , ℎ , (49)
where ℎ are the binary states of visible unit and hidden unit , , are their biases and is
the weight between them. The network assigns a probability to a possible pair of a visible and a
hidden vector via this energy function:
1 ( , )
( , ℎ) = , (50)
where the partition function, , is given by summing over all possible pairs of visible and hidden
vectors:
( , )
= . (51)
,
The probability that the network assigns to a visible vector, v, is given by summing over all
possible hidden vectors:
1 ( , )
( )= . (52)
The probability that the network assigns to a training sample can be raised by adjusting the
weights and biases to lower the energy of that sample and to raise the energy of other samples,
especially those have low energies and therefore make a big contribution to the partition function.
The derivative of the log probability of a training vector with respect to weight is surprisingly simple.
( )
=⟨ ℎ −⟨ ℎ , (53)
where the angle brackets are used to denote expectations under the distribution specified by the
subscript that follows. This leads to a simple learning rule for performing stochastic steepest ascent
in the log probability of the training data:
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 36 of 67
= ⟨ ℎ −⟨ ℎ , (54)
where is a learning rate. Given a randomly selected training image, , the binary state, ℎ , of each
hidden unit, j is set to 1 with probability
ℎ = 1| = + , (55)
where ( ) is the logistic sigmoid function 1⁄ 1 + ( ) , ℎ is then an unbiased sample. Because

there are no direct connections between visible units in an RBM, it is also easy to get an unbiased
sample of the state of a visible unit, given a hidden vector
( = 1|ℎ) = + ℎ . (56)
Getting an unbiased sample of ⟨ ℎ is much more difficult. It can be done by starting at

any random state of the visible units and performing alternating Gibbs sampling for a long time. A
single iteration of alternating Gibbs sampling consists of updating all the hidden units in parallel
using Equation (55) followed by updating all the visible units in parallel using the following Equation
(56). A much faster learning procedure was proposed in Hinton (2002). This starts by setting the states
of the visible units to a training vector. Then the binary states of the hidden units are all computed in
parallel using Equation (55). Once binary states have been chosen for the hidden units, a
reconstruction is produced by setting each to 1 with a probability given by Equation (56). The
change in weight is then given by
∆ = ⟨ ℎ −⟨ ℎ . (57)
A simplified version of the same learning rule that uses the states of individual units instead of
a pairwise product is used for the biases [214]. This approach is mainly used for pre-training a neural
network in an unsupervised manner to generate initial weights. One of the most popular deep
learning approaches called Deep Belief Network (DBN) is proposed based on this approach. Some of
the examples of the applications with RBM and DBN for data encoding, news clustering, image
segmentation, and cybersecurity are shown, for detail see References [57,215–217].
7. Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN)

At the beginning of this chapter, we started with a quote from Yann LeCun, GAN is the best
concept proposed in the last ten years in the field of deep learning (Neural networks).
7.1. Review on GAN

The concept of generative models in machine learning started a long time before which is used
for data modeling with conditional probability density function. Generally, this type of model is
considered a probabilistic model with a joint probability distribution over observation and target
(label) values. However, we did not see the big success of this generative model before. Recently,
deep learning-based generative models have become popular and shown enormous success in
different application domains.
Deep learning is a data-driven technique that performs better as the number of input samples
increased. Due to this reason, learning with reusable feature representations from a huge number of
the un-labels dataset has become an active research area. We mentioned in the introduction that
Computer vision has different tasks, segmentation, classification, and detection, which requires large
amounts of labeled data. This problem has been attempted to be solved be generating similar samples
with a generative model.
Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) is a deep learning approach recently invented by
Goodfellow in 2014. GANs offer an alternative approach to maximum likelihood estimation
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 37 of 67
techniques. GAN is an unsupervised deep learning approach where two neural networks compete
against each other in a zero-sum game. In the case of the image generation problem, the generator
starts with Gaussian noise to generate images and the discriminator determines how good the
generated images are. This process continues until the outputs of the generator become close to actual
input samples. According to Figure 38, it can be considered that Discriminator (D) and Generator (G)
two players playing the min-max game with the function of V (D, G) which can be expressed as
follows according to this paper [33,218].
( , )= ~ ( )[ ( ( ))] + ~ ( )[ (1 − ( ( )))]. (58)
Figure 38. Conceptual diagram for Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN).
In practice, this equation may not provide sufficient gradient for learning G (which started from
random Gaussian noise) at the early stages. In the early stages, D can reject samples because they are
clearly different compared to training samples. In this case, (1 − ( ( ))) will be saturated.
Instead of training G to minimize (1 − ( ( ))) we can train G to maximize ( ( )) objective
function which provides much better gradients in early stages during learning. However, there were
some limitations of convergence during training with the first version. In the beginning state a GAN
has some limitations regarding the following issues:
 The lack of a heuristic cost function (as pixel-wise approximate means square errors
(MSE))
 Unstable to train (sometimes that can because of producing nonsensical outputs)
Research in the area of GANs has been ongoing with many improved versions being proposed
[219]. GANs are able to produce photorealistic images for applications, such as visualization of
interior or industrial design, shoes, bags, and clothing items. GAN is also extensively used in the field
of game development and artificial video generation [220]. GANs have two different areas of DL that
they fall into semi-supervised and unsupervised. Some research in these areas focuses on the
topology of the GAN architecture to improve functionality and the training approach. Deep
convolution GAN (DCGAN) is a convolution-based GAN approach proposed in 2015 [221]. This
semi-supervised approach has shown promised results compared to its unsupervised counterpart.
The regenerated results from DCGAN have shown in the following figures [183]. Figure 39 according
to article in [221], shows the output for generated bedroom images after one training pass through
the dataset. Most of the figures included in this section are generated through experiments.
Theoretically, the model could learn to memorize training examples, but this is experimentally
unlikely as we train with a small learning rate and mini batches with SGD. We are aware of no prior
empirical evidence demonstrating memorization with SGD and a small learning rate [221].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 38 of 67
Figure 39. Experimental outputs of bedroom images.
Figure 40 represents generated bedroom images after five epochs of training. There appears to
be evidence of visual under-fitting via repeated noise textures across multiple samples, such as the
baseboards of some of the beds.
Figure 40. Reconstructed bedroom images using deep convolution GAN (DCGAN).
In Figure 40, according to article in [221], the top rows interpolation between a series of nine
random points in Z, and show that the learned space has smooth transitions. In every image, space
plausibly looks like a bedroom. In the 6th row, you see a room without a window slowly transforming
into a room with a giant window. In the 10th row, you see what appears to be a TV slowly being
transformed into a window. The following Figure 41 shows the effective application of latent space
vectors. Latent space vectors can be turned into meaning output by first performing addition and
subtraction operations followed by a decode. Figure 41 according to article in [221], shows that a man
with glasses minus a man and add a woman which results in a woman with glasses.
Figure 41. Example of smile arithmetic and arithmetic for wearing glass using GAN: a man with
glasses minus man without glasses plus woman without glasses equal to woman with glasses.
Figure 42, according to article in [221], shows a turn vector was created from four averaged
samples of faces looking left versus looking right. By adding interpolations along this axis of random
samples the pose can be reliably transformed. There are some interesting applications that have been
proposed for GANs. For example, natural indoor scenes are generated with improved GAN
structures. These GANs learn surface normal and are combined with a Style GAN by Wang and
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 39 of 67
Gupta [222]. In this implementation, authors considered the style and structure of GAN named (S2-
GAN), which generates a surface normal map. This is an improved version of GAN. In 2016, an
information-theoretic extension to the GAN called InfoGAN was proposed. An infoGAN can learn
with better representations in a completely unsupervised manner. The experimental results show
that the unsupervised InfoGAN is competitive with representation learning with the fully supervised
learning approach [223].
In 2016, another new architecture was proposed by Im et al. [224] where the recurrent concept
is included with the adversarial network during training. Chen et. al. [225] proposed Info GAN
(iGAN) which allowed image manipulation interactively on a natural image manifold. Image to
image translation with conditional adversarial networks is proposed in 2017. Another improved
version of GANs named Coupled Generative Adversarial Network (CoGAN) is a learned joint
distribution of multi-domain images. The existing approach does not need tuples of corresponding
images in different domains in the training set [226]. Bidirectional Generative Adversarial Networks
(BiGANs are learned with inverse feature mapping and shown that the resulting learned feature
representation is useful for auxiliary supervised discrimination tasks, competitive with
contemporary approaches to un-supervised and self-supervised feature learning [227].
Figure 42. Face generation in different angle using GAN.
Recently, Google proposed extended versions of GANs called Boundary Equilibrium Generative
Adversarial Networks (BEGAN) with a simple but robust architecture [228]. BEGAN has a better
training procedure with fast and stable convergence. The concept of equilibrium helps to balance the
power of the discriminator against the generator. In addition, it can balance the trade-off between
image diversity and visual quality [228]. Another similar work is called Wasserstein GAN (WGAN)
algorithm that shows significant benefits over traditional GAN [229]. WGANs had two major benefits
over traditional GANs. First, a WGAN meaningfully correlates the loss metric with the generator’s
convergence and sample quality. Secondly, WGANs have improved stability of the optimization
process.
The improved version of WGAN is proposed with a new clipping technique, which penalizes
the normal of the gradient of the critic with respect to its inputs [230]. There is a promising
architecture that has been proposed based on generative models where the images are represented
with untrained DNN that give an opportunity for better understanding and visualization of DNNs
[231]. Adversarial examples for generative models have also been introduced [232]. Energy-based
GAN was proposed by Yann LeCun from Facebook in 2016 [233]. The training process is difficult for
GANs, Manifold Matching GAN (MMGAN) proposed with better training process which is
experimented on three different datasets and the experimental results clearly demonstrate the
efficacy of MMGAN against other models [234]. GAN for geo-statistical simulation and inversion
with efficient training approach [235].
Probabilistic GAN (PGAN) which is a new kind of GAN with a modified objective function. The
main idea behind this method is to integrate a probabilistic model (A Gaussian Mixture Model) into
the GAN framework that supports likelihood rather than classification [236]. A GAN with Bayesian
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 40 of 67
Network model [237]. Variational Auto encode is a popular deep learning approach, which is trained
with Adversarial Variational Bayes (AVB) which helps to establish a principle connection between
VAE and GAN [238]. The f-GAN which is proposed based on the general feed-forward neural
network [239]. Markov model-based GAN for texture synthesis [240]. Another generative model
based on the doubly stochastic MCMC method [241]. GAN with multi-Generator [242]
Is an unsupervised GAN capable of learning on a pixel level domain adaptation that transforms
in the pixel space from one domain to another domain? This approach provides state-of-the-art
performance against several unsupervised domain adaptation techniques with a large margin [243].
A new network is proposed called Schema Network, which is an object-oriented generative physics
simulator able to disentangle multiple causes of events reasoning through causes to achieve a goal
that is learned from dynamics of an environment from data [244]. There is interesting research that
has been conducted with a GAN that is to Generate Adversarial Text to Image Synthesis. In this
paper, the new deep architecture is proposed for GAN formulation which can take the text
description of an image and produce realistic images with respect to the inputs. This is an effective
technique for text-based image synthesis using a character level text encoder and class conditional
GAN. GAN is evaluated on bird and flower dataset first then general text to the image which is
evaluated on MS COCO dataset [40].
7.2. Applications of GAN

This learning algorithm has been applied in the different domain of applications that are
discussed in the following sections:
7.2.1. GAN for Image Processing

GANs used for generating a photo-realistic image using a super-resolution approach [245]. GAN
for semantic segmentation with semi and weakly supervised approach [246]. Text Conditioned
Auxiliary Classifier GAN (TAC-GAN) which is used for generating or synthesizing images from a
text description [247]. Multi-style Generative network (MSG-Net) which retains the functionality of
optimization-based approaches with fast speed. This network matches image styles at multiple scales
and puts the computational burden into training [248]. Most of the time, vision systems struggle with
rain, snow, and fog. A single image de-raining system is proposed using a GAN recently [249].
7.2.2. GAN for Speech and Audio Processing

An End-to-End Dialogue system using Generative Hierarchical Neural Network models [250].
In addition, GANs have been used in the field of speech analysis. Recently, GANs are used for speech
enhancement which is called SEGAN that incorporates further speech-centric design to improve
performance progressively [251]. GAN for symbolic-domain and music generation which performs
comparably against Melody RNN [252].
7.2.3. GAN for Medical Information Processing

GANs for Medical Imagining and medical information processing [136], GANs for medical
image de-noising with Wasserstein distance and perceptual loss [253]. GANs can also be used for
segmentation of Brain Tumors with conditional GANs (cGAN) [254]. A General medical image
segmentation approach is proposed using a GAN called SegAN [255]. Before the deep learning
revolution, compressive sensing is one of the hottest topics. However, Deep GAN is used for
compressed sensing that automates MRI [256]. In addition, GANs can also be used in health record
processing, due to the privacy issue the electronic health record (EHR) is limited to or is not publicly
available like other datasets. GANs are applied to synthetic EHR data which could mitigate risk [257].
Time series data generation with Recurrent GAN (RGAN) and Recurrent Conditional GAN
(RCGAN) has been introduced [258]. LOGAN consists of the combination of a generative and
discriminative model for detecting the overfitting and recognition inputs. This technique has been
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 41 of 67
compared against state-of-the-art GAN technique, including GAN, DCGAN, BEGAN and a
combination of DCGAN with a VAE [259].
7.2.4. Other Applications

A new approach called Bayesian Conditional GAN (BC-GAN) which can generate samples from
deterministic inputs. This is simply a GAN with a Bayesian framework that can handle supervised,
semi-supervised and unsupervised learning problems [260,261]. In machine learning and deep
learning community, online learning is an important approach. GANs are used for online learning in
which it is being trained for finding a mixed strategy in a zero-sum game which is named Checkov
GAN 1 [262]. Generative moment matching networks based on statistical hypothesis testing called
maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) [263]. One of the interesting ideas to replace the discriminator
of GAN with two-sample based kernel MMD is called MMD-GAN. This approach significantly
outperforms the Generative moment matching network (GMMN) technique which is an alternative
approach for the generative model [264].
Some other applications of GAN include pose estimation [265], photo editing network [266], and
anomaly detection [267]. DiscoGAN for learning cross-domain relation with GAN [40], unsupervised
image-to-image translation with generative model, [268], single shot learning with GAN [269],
response generation and question answering system [270,271]. Last but not least, WaveNet as a
generative model has been developed for generating audio waveform in [272] and dual path network
in [273].
8. Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL)

In the previous sections, we have focused on supervised and unsupervised deep learning
approaches, including DNN, CNN, RNN including LSTM and GRU, AE, RBM, GAN etc. These types
of deep learning approaches are used for prediction, classification, encoding, decoding, data
generation, and many more application domains. However, this section demonstrates a survey on
Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) based on the recently developed methods in this field of RL.
8.1. Review on DRL

DRL is a learning approach which learns to act with general sense from the unknown real
environment (For details please read the following article [46,274]). The conceptual diagram for DRL
approach is shown in Figure 43. RL can be applied in a different scope of field, including fundamental
Sciences for decision making, Machine learning from a computer science point of view, in the field of
engineering and mathematics, optimal control, robotics control, power station control, wind turbines,
and Neuroscience the reward strategy is widely studied in the last couple of decades. It is also applied
in economic utility or game theory for making better decisions and for investment choices. The
psychological concept of classical conditioning is how animals learn. Reinforcement learning is a
technique for what to do and how to match a situation to an action. Reinforcement learning is
different from supervised learning technique and other kinds of learning approaches studies recently,
including traditional machine learning, statistical pattern recognition, and ANN.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 42 of 67
Figure 43. Conceptual diagram for Reinforcement Learning (RL) system.
Unlike the general supervised and unsupervised machine learning, RL is defined not by
characterizing learning methods, but by characterizing a learning problem. However, the recent
success of DL has had a huge impact on the success of DRL which is known as DRL. According to
the learning strategy, the RL technique is learned through observation. For observing the
environment, the promising DL techniques include CNN, RNN, LSTM, and GRU are used depending
upon the observation space. As DL techniques encode data efficiently, therefore, the following step
of action is performed more accurately. According to the action, the agent receives an appropriate
reward respectively. As a result, the entire RL approach becomes more efficient to learn and interact
in the environment with better performance.
However, the history of the modern DRL revolution began from Google Deep Mind in 2013 with
Atari games with DRL. In which the DRL based approaches perform better against the human expert
in almost all of the games. In this case, the environment is observed on video frames which are
processed using a CNN [275,276]. The success of DRL approaches depends on the level of difficulty
of the task attempt to be solved. After a huge success of Alpha-Go and Atari from Google Deep mind,
they proposed a reinforcement learning environment based on StarCraft II in 2017, which is called
SC2LE (StarCraft II Learning Environment) [277]. The SC2LE is a game with multi-agent with
multiple players’ interactions. This proposed approach has a large action space involving the
selection and control of hundreds of units. It contains many states to observe from raw feature space
and it uses strategies over thousands of steps. The open source Python-based StarCraft II game engine
has been provided free in online.
8.2. Q-Learning
There are some fundamental strategies which are essential to know for working with DRL. First,
the RL learning approach has a function that calculates the Quality of state-action combination which
is called Q-Learning (Q-function). Algorithm II describes the basic computational flow of Q-learning.
Q-learning is defined as a model-free reinforcement learning approach which is used to find an
optimal action-selection policy for any given (finite) Markov Decision Process (MDP). MDP is a
mathematical framework for modeling decision using state, action and rewards. Q-learning only
needs to know about the states available and what are the possible actions in each state. Another
improved version of Q-Learning known as Bi-directional Q-Learning. In this article, the Q-Learning
is discussed, for details on bi-directional Q-Learning please see Reference [278].
At each step , choose the action which maximizes the following function ( , )
 is an estimated utility function—it tells us how good an action is given in a certain
state
 ( , ) immediate reward for making an action best utility (Q) for the resulting state
This can be formulated with the recursive definition as follows:
( , )= ( , )+ ( , ) . (59)
This equation is called Bellman’s equation, which is the core equation for RL. Here ( , ) is the
immediate reward, is the relative value of delay vs. immediate rewards [0, 1] is the new state
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 43 of 67
after action . The and are an action in sate and respectively. The action is selected based
on the following equation:
( )= ( , ). (60)
In each state, a value is assigned called a Q-value. When we visit a state and we receive a reward
accordingly. We use the reward to update the estimated value for that state. As the reward is
stochastic, as a result, we need to visit the states many times. In addition, it is not guaranteed that we
will get the same reward (Rt) in another episode. The summation of the future rewards in episodic
tasks and environments are unpredictable, further in the future, we go further with the reward
diversely as expressed,
Gt = Rt+1 + Rt+2+ Rt+3 + ……. …. + RT. (61)

The sum of discounted future rewards in both cases are some factor as scalar.
Gt =  Rt+1 + 2 Rt+2+ 3 Rt+3 + ……. …. + TRT, (62)

here  is a constant. The more we are in the future, the less we take the reward into account.
Properties of Q-learning:
Convergence of Q-function: Approximation will be converged to the true Q-function,
but it must visit possible state-action pair infinitely many times.
 The state table size can be vary depending on the observation space and complexity.
 Unseen values are not considered during observation.
The way to fix these problems is to use a neural network (particularly DNN) as an approximation
instead of the state table. The inputs of DNN are the state and action and the outputs are numbers
between 0 and 1 that represent the utility encoding the states and actions properly. That is the place
where the deep learning approaches contribute to making better decisions with respect to the state
information. Most of the cases for observing the environment, we use several acquisition devices,
including a camera or other sensing devices for observing the learning environment. For example, if
you observed the setup for the challenge of Alpha-Go then it can be seen that the environment, action,
and reward are learned based on the pixel values (pixel in action). For details see References
[275,276,279].
However, it is difficult to develop an agent which can interact or perform well in any observation
environment. Therefore, most of the researchers in the field select their action space or environment
before training the agent for that environment. The benchmark concept, in this case, is a little bit
different compared to supervised or unsupervised deep learning approach. Due to the variety of
environments, the benchmark depends on what level of difficulty the environment has been
considered compared to the previous or exiting researches? The difficulties depend on the different
parameters, number of agents, a way of interaction between the agents, the number of players and
so on.
Recently, another good learning approach has been proposed for DRL [46,274]. There are many
papers published with different networks of DRL, including Deep Q-Networks (DQN), Double DQN,
Asynchronous methods, policy optimization strategy (including deterministic policy gradient, deep
deterministic policy gradient, guided policy search, trust region policy optimization, combining
policy gradient and Q-learning) are proposed [46,274]. Policy Gradient (DAGGER) Superhuman GO
using supervised learning with policy gradient and Monte Carlo tree search with value function
[46,280]. Robotics manipulation using guided policy search [281]. DRL for 3D games using policy
gradients [282].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 44 of 67
Algorithm II: Q-Learning

Initialization:
For each state-action pair ( , )
initialize the table entry ( , ) to zero
Steps:
1.Observed the current state s
2. REPEAT:
- Select an action a and execute it
- Received immediate reward r
- Observe the new state
- Update the table entry for ( , ) as follows:
( , ) = + ( , )
- =
8.3. Recent Trends of DRL with Applications

There is a survey published recently, where basic RL, DRL DQN, trust region policy
optimization, and asynchronous advantage actor-critic are proposed. This paper also discusses the
advantages of deep learning and focuses on visual understanding via RL and the current trend of
research [283]. A network cohesion constrained based on online RL techniques is proposed for health
care on mobile devices called mHealth. This system helps similar users to share information
efficiently to improve and convert the limited user information into better-learned policies [284].
Similar work with the group-driven RL is proposed for health care on a mobile device for
personalized mHealth Intervention. In this work, K-means clustering is applied for grouping the
people and finally shared with RL policy for each group [285]. Optimal policy learning is a
challenging task with RL for an agent. Option-Observation Initiation sets (OOIs) allow agents to learn
optimal policies in the challenging task of POMDPs which are learned faster than RNN [286]. 3D Bin
Packing Problem (BPP) is proposed with DRL. The main objective is to place the number of the
cuboid-shaped items that can minimize the surface area of the bin [287].
The import component of DRL is the reward which is determined based on the observation and
the action of the agent. The real-world reward function is not perfect at all times. Due to the sensor
error, the agent may get maximum reward whereas the actual reward should be smaller. This paper
proposed a formulation based on generalized Markov Decision Problem (MDP) called Corrupt
Reward MDP [288]. The trust region optimization based deep RL is proposed using recently
developed Kronecker-factored approximation to the curvature (K-FAC) [289]. In addition, there is
some research that has been conducted in the evaluation of physics experiments using the deep
learning approach. This experiment focuses agent to learn basic properties, such as mass and
cohesion of the objects in the interactive simulation environment [290].
Recently Fuzzy RL policies have been proposed that is suitable for continuous state and action
space [291]. The important investigation and discussion are made for hyper-parameters in policy
gradient for continuous control, the general variance of the algorithm. This paper also provides a
guideline for reporting results and comparison against baseline methods [292]. Deep RL is also
applied to high precision assembly tasks [293]. The Bellman equation is one of the main functions of
RL technique, a function approximation is proposed which ensures that the Bellman Optimality
Equation always holds. Then the function is estimated to maximize the likelihood of the observed
motion [294]. DRL based hierarchical system is used for could resource allocation and power
management in could computing system [295]. A novel Attention-aware Face Hallucination
(Attention-FC) is proposed where Deep RL is used for enhancing the quality of the image on a single
patch for images which are applied to face images [296].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 45 of 67
9. Bayesian Deep Learning (BDL)

The DL approaches have been providing state-of-the-art accuracy for different applications.
However, DL approaches are unable to deal with the uncertainty of a given task due to model
uncertainty. These learning approaches take input and assume the class probability without
justification [297,298]. In 2015, two African American humans recognized as gorilla with an image
classification system [299]. There are several application domains where the uncertainty can be
raised, including self-driven car, bio-medical applications. However, the BDN, which is an
intersection between DL and Bayesian probability approaches show better results in different
applications and understand the uncertainty of problems, including multi-task problems [297,298].
The uncertainty is estimated with applying probability distribution over the model weights or
mapping the outputs’ probability [297,298].
The BDL is becoming very popular among the DL research community. In addition, the BDL
approaches have been proposed with CNN techniques where the probability distribution is applied
to weight. These techniques help to deal with model overfitting problem and lack of training samples
which are the two commons challenges for DL approaches [300,301]. Finally, there are some other
research papers have published recently where some advanced techniques have been proposed on
BDL [302–305].
Figure 44. Conceptual diagram for transfer learning: Pretrained on ImageNet and transfer learning is
used for retraining on PASCAL dataset.
10. Transfer Learning
10.1. Transfer Learning

A good way to explain transfer learning is to look at the student-teacher relationship. A teacher
offers a course after gathering details knowledge regarding that subject [48]. The information will be
conveyed through a series of lectures over time. This can be considered that the teacher (expert) is
transferring information (knowledge) to the students (learner). The same thing happens in case of
deep learning, a network is trained with a big amount data and during the training, the model learns
the weights and bias. These weights can be transferred to other networks for testing or retraining a
similar new model. The network can start with pre-trained weights instead of training from scratch.
The conceptual diagram for transfer learning method is shown in Figure 44.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 46 of 67
Table 3. Criterions need to be considered for transfer learning.
Methods New dataset but small New dataset but large

Pre-trained model on Freeze weights and train Fine-tune all the layers (pre-train
similar but new linear classifier from top for faster convergence and better
dataset level features generalization)
Pre-trained model a Freeze weights and train
Fine-tune all the layers (pre-train
on different but new linear classifier from non-
for enhanced convergence speed)
dataset top-level features
10.2. What Is A Pre-trained Model?

A pre-trained model is a model which is already trained in the same domains as the intended
domain. For example, for an image recognition task, an Inception model already trained on ImageNet
can be downloaded. The Inception model can then be used for a different recognition task, and
instead of training it from scratch the weights can be left as is with some learned features. This method
of training is useful when there is a lack of sample data. There are a lot of pre-trained models available
(including VGG, ResNet, and Inception Net on different datasets) in model-zoo from the following
link: https://github.com/BVLC/caffe/wiki/Model-Zoo.
10.3. Why Will You Use Pre-trained Models?

There are a lot of reasons for using pre-trained models. Firstly, it requires a lot of expensive
computation power to train big models on big datasets. Secondly, it can take up to multiple weeks to
train big models. Training new models with pre-trained weights can speed up convergence, as well
as help the network generalization.
10.4. How Will You Use Pre-trained Models?

We need to consider the following criterions with respective application domains and size of the
dataset when using the pre-trained weights which are shown in Table 3.
10.5. Working with Inference

Research groups working specifically on inference applications look into optimization
approaches that include model compression. Model compression is important in the realm of mobile
devices or special purpose hardware because it makes models more energy efficient, as well as faster.
10.6. The Myth about Deep Learning

There is a myth; do you need a million labeled samples for training a deep learning model? The
answer is yes but, in most cases, the transfer learning approach is used to train deep learning
approaches without having large amounts of label data. For example, the following Figure 44
demonstrates the strategy for the transfer learning approach in details. Here the primary model has
been trained with a large amount of labeled data which is ImageNet and then the weights are used
to train with the PASCAL dataset. The actual reality is:
 Possible to learn useful representations from unlabeled data.
 Transfer learning can help learned representation from the related task [306].
We can take a trained network for a different domain which can be adapted for any other domain
for the target task [307,308]. First training a network with a close domain for which it is easy to get
labeled data using standard backpropagation, for example, ImageNet classification, pseudo classes
from augmented data. Then cut off the top layers of network and replace with the supervised
objective for the target domain. Finally, tune the network using backpropagation with labels for the
target domain until validation loss starts to increase [307,308]. There are some survey papers and
books that are published on transfer learning [309,310]. Self-taught learning with transfer learning
[311]. Boosting approach for transfer learning [312].
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 47 of 67
11. Energy Efficient Approaches and Hardware for DL
11.1. Overview
DNNs have been successfully applied and achieved better recognition accuracies in different
application domains, such as computer vision, speech processing, natural language processing, big
data problem and many more. However, most of the cases the training is being executed on Graphics
Processing Units (GPU) for dealing with big volumes of data which is expensive in terms of power.
Recently researchers have been training and testing with deeper and wider networks to achieve
even better classification accuracy to achieve human or beyond human level recognition accuracy in
some cases. While the size of the neural network is increasing, it becomes more powerful and
provides better classification accuracy. However, the storage consumption, memory bandwidth and
computational cost are increasing exponentially. On the other hand, these types of massive scale
implementation with large numbers of network parameters are not suitable for low power
implementation, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), different medical devices, a low memory system,
such as mobile devices, Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) and so on.
There is much research going on to develop better network structures or networks with lower
computation cost, fewer numbers of parameters for low-power and low-memory systems without
lowering classification accuracy. There are two ways to design an efficient deep network structure:
 The first approach is to optimize the internal operational cost with an efficient network
structure;
 Second design a network with low precision operations or a hardware efficient network.
The internal operations and parameters of a network structure can be reduced by using low
dimensional convolution filters for convolution layers [71,99].
There is a lot of benefit to this approach. Firstly, the convolutional with rectification operations
makes the decision more discriminative. Secondly, the main benefit of this approach is to reduce the
number of computation parameters drastically. For example, if one layer has 5×5 dimensional filters
which can be replaced with two 3×3 dimensional filters (without pooling layer in between then) for
better feature learning; three 3×3 dimensional filters can be used as a replacement of 7×7 dimensional
filters and so on. Benefits of using a lower-dimensional filter are that assuming both the present
convolutional layer has C channels, for three layers for 3×3 filter the total number of parameters are
weights: 3×(3×3×C×C) =27 weights, whereas in the size of the filter is 7×7, the total number of
parameters are (7×7×C×C) =49 , which is almost double compared to the three 3×3 filter parameters.
Moreover, placement of layers, such as convolutional, pooling, drop-out in the network in different
intervals has an impact on overall classification accuracy. There are some strategies that are
mentioned to optimize the network architecture recently to design robust deep learning models
[99,100,313] and efficient implementation of CNNs on FPGA platform [314].
Strategy 1: Replace the 3×3 filter with 1×1 filters. The main reasons to use a lower dimension
filter to reduce the overall number of parameter. By replacing 3×3 filters with 1×1 can be reduced 9x
number of parameters.
Strategy 2: Decrease the number of input channels to 3×3 filters. For a layer, the sizes of the
output feature maps are calculated, which is related to the network parameters using + 1, where
N is input map’s size, F is filter size, S is for strides. To reduce the number of parameters, it is not
only enough to reduce the size of the filters, but also it requires controlling number of input channels
or featuring dimension.
Strategy 3: Down-sample late in the network so that convolution layers have activation maps:
The outputs of present convolution layers can be at least 1x1 or often larger than 11. The output
width and height can be controlled by some criterions: (1) The size of the input sample (e.g., 256256)
and (2) Choosing the post down sample layer. Most commonly pooling layers are such as average or
max pooling layer is used, there is an alternative sub-sampling layer with convolution (33 filters)
and stride with 2. If most of the earlier layers have larger stride, then most of the layers will have
small numbers of activation maps.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 48 of 67
11.2. Binary or Ternary Connect Neural Networks

The computation cost can be reduced drastically with the low precision of multiplication and
few multiplications with drop connection [315,316]. These papers also introduced on Binary Connect
Neural Networks (BNN) Ternary Connect Neural Networks (TNN). Generally, multiplication of a
real-valued weight by a real-valued activation (in the forward propagations) and gradient calculation
(in the backward propagations) are the main operations of deep neural networks. Binary connect or
BNN is a technique that eliminates the multiplication operations by converting the weights used in
the forward propagation to be binary, i.e., constrained to only two values (0 and 1 or -1 and 1). As a
result, the multiplication operations can be performed by simple additions (and subtractions) and
makes the training process faster. There are two ways to convert real values to its corresponding
binary values, such as deterministic and stochastic. In the case of the deterministic technique,
straightforward thresholding technique is applied to weights. An alternative way to do that is a
stochastic approach where a matrix is converted to binary based on probability where the hard sigmoid
function is used because it is computationally inexpensive. The experimental result shows
significantly good recognition accuracy [317–319]. There are several advantages of BNN as follows:
 It is observed that the binary multiplication on GPU is almost seven times faster than
traditional matrix multiplication on GPU
 In forward pass, BNNs drastically reduce memory size and accesses, and replace most
arithmetic operation with bit-wise operations, which lead great increase of power
efficiency
 Binarized kernels can be used in CNNs which can reduce around 60% complexity of
dedicated hardware.
 It is also observed that memory accesses typically consume more energy compared to
the arithmetic operation and memory access cost increases with memory size. BNNs are
beneficial with respect to both aspects.
There are some other techniques that have been proposed in the last few years [320–323].
Another power efficient and hardware friendly network structure has been proposed for a CNN with
XNOR operations. In XNOR based CNN implementations, both the filters and input to the
convolution layer is binary. This result about 58x faster convolutional operations and 32x memory
saving. In the same paper, Binary-Weight-Networks was proposed which saved around 32x memory
saving. That makes it possible to implement state-of-the-art networks on CPU for real-time use
instead of GPU. These networks are tested on the ImageNet dataset and provide only 2.9% less
classification accuracy than full-precision AlexNet (in top-1% measure). This network requires less
power and computation time. This could make it possible to accelerate the training process of deep
neural network dramatically for specialized hardware implementation [273,274]. For the first time,
Energy Efficient Deep Neural Network (EEDN) architecture was proposed for the neuromorphic
system in 2016. In addition, they released a deep learning framework called EEDN, which provides
close accuracy to state-of-the-art accuracy almost all the popular benchmarks except ImageNet
dataset [324,325].
12. Hardware for DL

Along with the algorithmic development of DL approaches, there are many hardware
architectures have been proposed in the past few years [326]. The details about present trends of
hardware for deep learning have been published recently [49,326]. MIT proposed Eyeriss as
hardware for deep convolutional neural networks (DCNN) [327]. There is another architecture for
machine learning called Dadiannao [328]. Google developed hardware named Tensor Processing
Unit (TPU) for deep learning and was released in 2017 [329]. In 2016, efficient hardware that works
for inference was released and proposed by Stanford University called Efficient Inference Engine
(EIE) [330]. IBM released a neuromorphic system called TrueNorth in 2015 [324].
Deep learning approaches are not limited to the HPC platform, there is a lot of application
already developed which run on mobile devices. Mobile platforms provide data that is relevant to
everyday activities of the user, which can make a mobile system more efficient and robust by
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 49 of 67
retraining the system with collected data. There is some research ongoing to develop hardware
friendly algorithms for DL [331–333].
13. Other topics

There are several important topics, including frameworks, SDK, benchmark datasets, related
Journals and Conferences are included in Appendix.
14. Summary
In this paper, we have provided an in-depth review of deep learning and its applications over
the past few years. Different state-of-the-art deep learning models in different categories of learning,
including supervised, unsupervised, and Reinforcement Learning (RL), as well as their applications
in different domains were reviewed. In addition, we have explained in detail the different supervised
deep learning techniques, including DNN, CNN, and RNN. The un-supervised deep learning
techniques, including AE, RBM, and GAN, were reviewed in detail. In the same section, we have
considered and explained unsupervised learning techniques which are proposed based on LSTM and
RL. In Section 8, we presented a survey on Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) with the fundamental
learning technique called Q-Learning. The recently developed Bayesian Deep Learning (BDL) and
Transfer Learning (TL) approaches are also discussed in Sections 9 and 10, respectively. Furthermore,
we have conducted a survey on energy efficient deep learning approaches, transfer learning with DL,
and hardware development trends of DL. Moreover, we have discussed some DL frameworks and
benchmark datasets, which are often used for the implementation and evaluation of deep learning
approaches. Finally, we have included relevant journals and conferences, where the DL community
has been publishing their valuable research articles.
Funding: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under awards 1718633 and
1309708.
Acknowledgments: We would like to thank all authors mentioned in the reference of this paper from
whom we have learned a lot and thus made this review paper possible.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix
Most of the time people use different deep learning frameworks and Standard Development Kits
(SDKs) for implementing deep learning approaches which are listed below:
A1. Frameworks
 Tensorflow: https://www.tensorflow.org/
 Caffe: http://caffe.berkeleyvision.org/
 KERAS: https://keras.io/
 Theano: http://deeplearning.net/software/theano/
 Torch: http://torch.ch/
 PyTorch: http://pytorch.org/
 Lasagne: https://lasagne.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
 DL4J (DeepLearning4J): https://deeplearning4j.org/
 Chainer: http://chainer.org/
 DIGITS: https://developer.nvidia.com/digits
 CNTK (Microsoft): https://github.com/Microsoft/CNTK
 MatConvNet: http://www.vlfeat.org/matconvnet/
 MINERVA: https://github.com/dmlc/minerva
 MXNET: https://github.com/dmlc/mxnet
 OpenDeep: http://www.opendeep.org/
 PuRine: https://github.com/purine/purine2
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 50 of 67
 PyLerarn2: http://deeplearning.net/software/pylearn2/
 TensorLayer: https://github.com/zsdonghao/tensorlayer
 LBANN: https://github.com/LLNL/lbann
A2. SDKs
 cuDNN: https://developer.nvidia.com/cudnn
 TensorRT: https://developer.nvidia.com/tensorrt
 DeepStreamSDK: https://developer.nvidia.com/deepstream-sdk
 cuBLAS: https://developer.nvidia.com/cublas
 cuSPARSE: http://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cusparse/
 NCCL : https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/fast-multi-gpu-collectives-nccl/
A3. Benchmark Datasets

Here is the list of benchmark datasets that are used often to evaluate deep learning approaches
in different domains of application:
A3.1. Image Classification or Detection or Segmentation

List of datasets are used in the field of image processing and computer vision:
 MNIST: http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/mnist/
 CIFAR 10/100: https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~kriz/cifar.html
 SVHN/ SVHN2: http://ufldl.stanford.edu/housenumbers/
 CalTech 101/256: http://www.vision.caltech.edu/Image_Datasets/Caltech101/
 STL-10: https://cs.stanford.edu/~acoates/stl10/
 NORB: http://www.cs.nyu.edu/~ylclab/data/norb-v1.0/
 SUN-dataset: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/vision/SUN/
 ImageNet: http://www.image-net.org/
 National Data Science Bowl Competition: http://www.datasciencebowl.com/
 COIL 20/100: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/CAVE/software/softlib/coil-20.php
 MS COCO DATASET: http://mscoco.org/
 MIT-67 scene dataset: http://web.mit.edu/torralba/www/indoor.html
 Caltech-UCSD Birds-200 dataset: http://www.vision.caltech.edu/visipedia/CUB-200-
2011.html
 Pascal VOC 2007 dataset: http://host.robots.ox.ac.uk/pascal/VOC/voc2007/
 H3D Human Attributes dataset:
https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Projects/CS/vision/shape/poselets/
 Face recognition dataset: http://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/lfw/
 For more data-set visit: https://www.kaggle.com/
 http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/CVonline/Imagedbase.htm
 Recently Introduced Datasets in Sept. 2016:
 Google Open Images (~9M images)—https://github.com/openimages/dataset
 Youtube-8M (8M videos: https://research.google.com/youtube8m/
A3.2. Text Classification

 Reuters-21578 Text Categorization Collection:
http://kdd.ics.uci.edu/databases/reuters21578/reuters21578.html
 Sentiment analysis from Stanford: http://ai.stanford.edu/~amaas/data/sentiment/
 Movie sentiment analysis from Cornel:
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/pabo/movie-review-data/
A3.3. Language Modeling

Electronics 2019, 8, 292 51 of 67
 Free eBooks: https://www.gutenberg.org/

 Brown and stanford corpus on present americal english:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Corpus
 Google 1Billion word corpus: https://github.com/ciprian-chelba/1-billion-word-
language-modeling-benchmark
A3.4. Image Captioning

Flickr-8k: http://nlp.cs.illinois.edu/HockenmaierGroup/8k-pictures.html
 Flickr-30k
 Common Objects in Context (COCO):
http://cocodataset.org/#overview,
http://sidgan.me/technical/2016/01/09/Exploring-Datasets
A3.4. Machine Translation

 Pairs of sentences in English and French: https://www.isi.edu/natural-
language/download/hansard/
 European Parliament Proceedings parallel Corpus 196-2011:
http://www.statmt.org/europarl/
 The statistics for machine translation: http://www.statmt.org/
A3.5. Question Answering

 Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD): https://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-
explorer/
 Dataset from DeepMind: https://github.com/deepmind/rc-data
 Amazon dataset:
http://jmcauley.ucsd.edu/data/amazon/qa/,
http://trec.nist.gov/data/qamain...,
http://www.ark.cs.cmu.edu/QA-data/,
http://webscope.sandbox.yahoo.co...,
http://blog.stackoverflow.com/20..
A3.6. Speech Recognition

 TIMIT : https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC93S1
 Voxforge: http://voxforge.org/
 Open Speech and Language Resources: http://www.openslr.org/12/
A3.7. Document Summarization

 https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Legal+Case+Reports
 http://www-nlpir.nist.gov/related_projects/tipster_summac/cmp_lg.html
 https://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/LDC2002T31
A3.8. Sentiment analysis:

 IMDB dataset: http://www.imdb.com/
A3.9. Hyperspectral Image Analysis

 http://www.ehu.eus/ccwintco/index.php/Hyperspectral_Remote_Sensing_Scenes
 https://engineering.purdue.edu/~biehl/MultiSpec/hyperspectral.html
 http://www2.isprs.org/commissions/comm3/wg4/HyRANK.html
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 52 of 67
In addition, there is another alternative solution in data programming that labels subsets of data
using weak supervision strategies or domain heuristics as labeling functions even if they are noisy
and may conflict samples [87].
A4. Journals and Conferences

In general, researchers publish their primary version of research on the ArXiv ( https://arxiv.org/
). Most of the conferences have been accepting papers on Deep learning and its related field. Popular
conferences are listed below:
A4.1. Conferences
 Neural Information Processing System (NIPS)
 International Conference on Learning Representation (ICLR): What are you doing for
Deep Learning?
 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)
 Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR): What are you doing with Deep
Learning?
 International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
 European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)
 British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC)
A4.2. Journal
 Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR)
 IEEE Transaction of Neural Network and Learning System (
 IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI)
 Computer Vision and Image Understanding (CVIU)
 Pattern Recognition Letter
 Neural Computing and Application
 International Journal of Computer Vision
 IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
 IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine
 Proceedings of IEEE
 IEEE Signal Processing Magazine
 Neural Processing Letter
 Pattern Recognition
 Neural Networks
 ISPPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
A4.3. Tutorials on Deep Learning

 http://deeplearning.net/tutorial/
 http://deeplearning.stanford.edu/tutorial/
 http://deeplearning.net/tutorial/deeplearning.pdf
 Courses on Reinforcement Learning: http://rll.berkeley.edu/deeprlcourse/
A4.4. Books on Deep Learning

 https://github.com/HFTrader/DeepLearningBookhttps://github.com/janishar/mit-deep-
learning-book-pdf
 http://www.deeplearningbook.org/
References
1. Schmidhuber, J. Deep Learning in Neural Networks: An Overview. Neural Netw. 2015, 61, 85–117.
2. Bengio, Y.; LeCun, Y.; Hinton, G. Deep Learning. Nature 2015, 521, 436–444.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 53 of 67
3. Bengio, Y.; Courville, A.; Vincent, P. Representation Learning: A Review and New Perspectives. IEEE Trans.
Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2013, 35, 1798–1828.
4. Bengio, Y. Learning deep architectures for AI. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 2009, 2, 1–127.
5. Mnih, V.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Silver, D.; Rusu, A.A.; Veness, J.; Bellemare, M.G.; Graves, A.; Riedmiller, M.;
Fidjeland, A.K.; Ostrovski, G.; et al. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 2015,
518, 529–533.
6. Mnih, V.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Silver, D.; Graves, A.; Antonoglou, I.; Wierstra, D.; Riedmiller, M. Playing atari
with deep reinforcement learning. arXiv 2013, arXiv:1312.5602.
7. Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Hinton, G.E. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural
networks. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems,
Lake Tahoe, NV, USA, 3–6 December 2012; pp. 1106–1114.
8. Zeiler, M.D.; Fergus, R. Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks. arXiv 2013,
arXiv:1311.2901.
9. Simonyan, K.; Zisserman, A. deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv 2014,
arXiv:1409.1556.
10. Szegedy, C.; Liu, W.; Jia, Y.; Sermanet, P.; Reed, S.; Anguelov, D.; Erhan, D.; Vanhoucke, V.; Rabinovich,
A. Going deeper with convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015; pp. 1–9.
11. He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 770–
778.
12. Canziani, A.; Paszke, A.; Culurciello, E. An analysis of deep neural network models for practical
applications. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1605.07678.
13. Zweig, G. Classification and recognition with direct segment models. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE
International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Kyoto, Japan, 25–30 March
2012; pp. 4161–4164.
14. He, Y.; Fosler-Lussier, E. Efficient segmental conditional random fields for one-pass phone recognition. In
Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association,
Portland, OR, USA, 9–13 September 2012.
15. Abdel-Hamid, O.; Deng, L.; Yu, D.; Jiang, H. Deep segmental neural networks for speech recognition.
Interspeech 2013, 36, 70.
16. Tang, H.; Wang, W.; Gimpel, K.; Livescu, K. Discriminative segmental cascades for feature-rich phone
recognition. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and
Understanding (ASRU), 2015; pp. 561–568.
17. Song, W.; Cai, J. End-to-end deep neural network for automatic speech recognition. 1. (Errors: 21.1), 2015.
Available online: https://cs224d.stanford.edu/reports/SongWilliam.pdf (accessed on 17 January 2018).
18. Deng, L.; Abdel-Hamid, O.; Yu, D. A deep convolutional neural network using heterogeneous pooling for
trading acoustic invariance with phonetic confusion. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International
Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 26–31 May
2013; pp. 6669–6673.
19. Graves, A.; Mohamed, A.-R.; Hinton, G. Speech recognition with deep recurrent neural networks. In
Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing
(ICASSP), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 26–31 May 2013; pp. 6645–6649.
20. Zhang, Y.; Pezeshki, M.; Brakel, P.; Zhang, S.; Bengio, C.L.Y.; Courville, A. Towards end-to-end speech
recognition with deep convolutional neural networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.02720
21. Deng, L.; Platt, J. Ensemble deep learning for speech recognition. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual
Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Singapore, 14–18 September 2014.
22. Chorowski, J.K.; Bahdanau, D.; Serdyuk, D.; Cho, K.; Bengio, Y. Attention-based models for speech
recognition. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015;
pp. 577–585.
23. Lu, L.; Kong, L.; Dyer, C.; Smith, N.A.; Renals, S. Segmental recurrent neural networks for end-to-end
speech recognition. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1603.00223.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 54 of 67
24. Van Essen, B.; Kim, H.; Pearce, R.; Boakye, K.; Chen, B. LBANN: Livermore big artificial neural network
HPC toolkit. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Machine Learning in High-Performance Computing
Environments, 2015; p. 5.
25. Li, Y.; Yu, R.; Shahabi, C.; Liu, Y. Graph Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network: Data-Driven Traffic
Forecasting. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1707.01926.
26. Md, Z.A.; Aspiras, T.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K.; Bowen, T.J. Advanced deep convolutional neural network
approaches for digital pathology image analysis: A comprehensive evaluation with different use cases, In
Proceedings of the Pathology Visions 2018, San Diego, CA, USA, 4–6 November 2018.
27. Long, J.; Shelhamer, E.; Darrell, T. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation. In Proceedings
of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015;
pp. 3431–3440.
28. Alom, M.Z.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Nuclei Segmentation with Recurrent Residual
Convolutional Neural Networks based U-Net (R2U-Net). In Proceedings of the NAECON 2018-IEEE
National Aerospace and Electronics Conference, Dayton, OH, USA, 23–26 July 2018; pp. 228–233.
29. Alom, M.Z.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Microscopic Blood Cell Classification Using Inception
Recurrent Residual Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the NAECON 2018-IEEE National
Aerospace and Electronics Conference, Dayton, OH, USA, 23–26 July 2018; pp. 222–227
30. Chen, X.-W.; Lin, X. Big Data Deep Learning: Challenges and Perspectives. IEEE Access 2014, 2, 514–525.
31. Zhou, Z.-H.; Chawla, N.V.; Jin, Y.; Williams, G.J. Big data opportunities and challenges: Discussions from
data analytics perspectives. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 2014, 9, 62–74.
32. Najafabadi, M.M.; Villanustre, F.; Khoshgoftaar, T.M.; Seliya, N.; Wald, R.; Muharemagic, E. Deep learning
applications and challenges in big data analytics. J. Big Data 2015, 2, 1.
33. Goodfellow, I.; Pouget-Abadie, J.; Mirza, M.; Xu, B.; Warde-Farley, D.; Ozair, S.; Courville, A.; Bengio, Y.
Generative adversarial nets. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; The MIT Press:
Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 2672–2680.
34. Kaiser, L.; Gomez, A.N.; Shazeer, N.; Vaswani, A.; Parmar, N.; Jones, L.; Uszkoreit, J. One model to learn
them all. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.05137.
35. Collobert, R.; Weston, J. A unified architecture for natural language processing: Deep neural networks with
multitask learning. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki,
Finland, 5–9 July 2008; pp. 160–167.
36. Johnson, M.; Schuster, M.; Le, Q.V.; Krikun, M.; Wu, Y.; Chen, Z.; Thorat, N.; Viégas, F.; Wattenberg, M.;
Corrado, G.; et al. Google’s multilingual neural machine translation system: Enabling zero-shot translation.
Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 2017, 5, 339–351.
37. Argyriou, A.; Evgeniou, T.; Pontil, M. Multi-task feature learning. In Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007; pp. 41–48.
38. Singh, K.; Gupta, G.; Vig, L.; Shroff, G.; Agarwal, P. Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Pairwise
Causality. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.00597.
39. Yu, H.; Wang, J.; Huang, Z.; Yang, Y.; Xu, W. Video paragraph captioning using hierarchical recurrent
neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las
Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 4584–4593.
40. Kim, T.; Cha, M.; Kim, H.; Lee, J.K.; Kim, J. Learning to discover cross-domain relations with generative
adversarial networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.05192.
41. Reed, S.; Akata, Z.; Yan, X.; Logeswaran, L.; Schiele, B.; Lee, H. Generative adversarial text to image
synthesis. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1605.05396.
42. Deng, L.; Yu, D. Deep learning: Methods and applications. Found. Trends Signal Process. 2014, 7, 197–387.
43. Gu, J.; Wang, Z.; Kuen, J.; Ma, L.; Shahroudy, A.; Shuai, B.; Liu, T.; et al. Recent advances in convolutional
neural networks. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1512.07108.
44. Sze, V.; Chen, Y.; Yang, T.; Emer, J.S. Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey.
Proc. IEEE 2017, 105, 2295–2329.
45. Kwon, D.; Kim, H.; Kim, J.; Suh, S.C.; Kim, I.; Kim, K.J. A survey of deep learning-based network anomaly
detection. Cluster Comput. 2017, 1–13. doi:10.1007/s10586-017-1117-8.
46. Li, Y. Deep reinforcement learning: An overview. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.07274.
47. Kober, J.; Bagnell, J.A.; Peters, J. Reinforcement learning in robotics: A survey. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2013, 32,
1238–1274.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 55 of 67
48. Pan, S.J.; Yang, Q. A survey on transfer learning. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2010, 22, 1345–1359.
49. Schuman, C.D.; Potok, T.E.; Patton, R.M.; Birdwell, J.D.; Dean, M.E.; Rose, G.S.; Plank, J.S. A survey of
neuromorphic computing and neural networks in hardware. 2017, arXiv:1705.06963.
50. McCulloch, W.S.; Pitts, W. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys.
1943, 5, 115–133.
51. Rosenblatt, F. The perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain.
Psychol. Rev. 1958, 65, 386.
52. Minsky, M.; Papert, S.A. Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA,
USA, 2017.
53. Ackley, D.H.; Hinton, G.E.; Sejnowski, T.J. A learning algorithm for Boltzmann machines. Cogn. Sci. 1985,
9, 147–169.
54. Fukushima, K. Neocognitron: A hierarchical neural network capable of visual pattern recognition. Neural
Netw. 1988, 1, 119–130.
55. LeCun, Y.; Bottou, L.; Bengio, Y.; Haffner, P. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition.
Proc. IEEE 1998, 86, 2278–2324.
56. Hinton, G.E.; Osindero, S.; Teh, Y.-W. A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural Comput. 2006,
18, 1527–1554.
57. Hinton, G.E.; Salakhutdinov, R.R. Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 2006,
313, 504–507.
58. Bottou, L. Stochastic gradient descent tricks. In Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 421–436.
59. Rumelhart, D.E.; Hinton, G.E.; Williams, R.J. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Cogn.
Model. 1988, 5, 1.
60. Sutskever, I.; Martens, J.; Dahl, G.; Hinton, G. On the importance of initialization and momentum in deep
learning. Int. Conf. Mach. Learning. 2013, 28, 1139–1147.
61. Yoshua B.; Lamblin, P.; Popovici, D.; Larochelle, H. Greedy Layer-Wise Training of Deep Network. In
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19 (NIPS 2006); MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007;
pp. 153–160.
62. Erhan, D.; Manzagol, P.; Bengio, Y.; Bengio, S.; Vincent, P. The difficulty of training deep architectures and
the effect of unsupervised pre-training. Artif. Intell. Stat. 2009, 5, 153–160.
63. Mohamed, A.-R.; Dahl, G.E.; Hinton, G. Acoustic modeling using deep belief networks. IEEE Trans. Audio
Speech Lang. Process. 2012, 20, 14–22
64. Nair, V.; Hinton, G.E. Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the
27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-10), Haifa, Israel, 21–24 June 2010; pp. 807–814.
65. Vincent, P.; Larochelle, H.; Bengio, Y.; Manzagol, Pi. Extracting and composing robust features with
denoising autoencoders. In Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth International Conference on Machine Learning,
Helsinki, Finland, 5–9 July 2008; pp. 1096–1103.
66. Lin, M.; Chen, Q.; Yan, S. Network in network. arXiv 2013, arXiv:1312.4400.
67. Springenberg, J.T.; Dosovitskiy, A.; Brox, T.; Riedmiller, M. Striving for simplicity: The all convolutional
net. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.6806.
68. Huang, G.; Liu, Z.; van der Maaten, L.; Weinberger, K.Q. Densely connected convolutional networks. In
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–
26 July 2017; pp. 4700–4708.
69. Larsson, G.; Maire, M.; Shakhnarovich, G. FractalNet: Ultra-Deep Neural Networks without Residuals.
arXiv 2016, arXiv:1605.07648.
70. Szegedy, C.; Ioffe, S.; Vanhoucke, V. Inception-v4, inception-resnet and the impact of residual connections
on learning. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1602.07261.
71. Szegedy, C.; Vanhoucke, V.; Ioffe, S.; Shlens, J.; Wojna, Z. Rethinking the inception architecture for
computer vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las
Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 2818–2826.
72. Zagoruyko, S.; Komodakis, N. Wide Residual Networks. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1605.07146.
73. Xie, S.; Girshick, R.; Dollár, P.; Tu, Z.; He, K. Aggregated residual transformations for deep neural networks.
arXiv 2016, arXiv:1611.05431.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 56 of 67
74. Veit, A.; Wilber, M.J.; Belongie, S. Residual networks behave like ensembles of relatively shallow networks.
In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 550–558.
75. Abdi, M.; Nahavandi, S. Multi-Residual Networks: Improving the Speed and Accuracy of Residual
Networks. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1609.05672.
76. Zhang, X.; Li, Z.; Loy, C.C.; Lin, D. Polynet: A pursuit of structural diversity in very deep networks. In
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–
26 July 2017; pp. 718–726.
77. Alom, M.Z.; Hasan, M.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Improved inception-residual convolutional
neural network for object recognition. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1712.09888.
78. Ioffe, S.; Szegedy, C. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal
covariate shift. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1502.03167.
79. Sabour, S.; Frosst, N.; Hinton, G.E. Dynamic routing between capsules. In Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems (NIPS); MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 3856–3866.
80. Ren, S.; He, K.; Girshick, R.; Sun, J. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal
networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015; pp.
91–99.
81. Chollet, F. Xception: Deep Learning with Depthwise Separable Convolutions. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1610.02357.
82. Liang, M.; Hu, X. Recurrent convolutional neural network for object recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015.
83. Alom, M.Z.; Hasan, M.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M. Inception Recurrent Convolutional Neural Network for
Object Recognition. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1704.07709.
84. Li, Y.; Ouyang, W.; Wang, X.; Tang, X. Vip-cnn: Visual phrase guided convolutional neural network. In
Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Honolulu,
HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 7244–7253.
85. Bagherinezhad, H.; Rastegari, M.; Farhadi, A. LCNN: Lookup-based Convolutional Neural Network. arXiv
2016, arXiv:1611.06473.
86. Bansal, A.; Chen, X.; Russell, B.; Gupta, A.; Ramanan, D. Pixelnet: Representation of the pixels, by the pixels,
and for the pixels. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1702.06506
87. Huang, G.; Sun, Y.; Liu, Z.; Sedra, D.; Weinberger, K.Q. Deep networks with stochastic depth. In European
Conference on Computer Vision; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 646–661.
88. Lee, C.-Y.; Xie, S.; Gallagher, P.; Zhang, Z.; Tu, Z. Deeply-supervised nets. In Proceedings of the Artificial
Intelligence and Statistics; San Diego, CA, USA, 9–12 May 2015; pp. 562–570.
89. Pezeshki, M.; Fan, L.; Brakel, P.; Courville, A.; Bengio, Y. Deconstructing the ladder network architecture.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, New York, NY, USA, 20–22 June
2016; pp. 2368–2376.
90. Rawat, W.; Wang, Z. Deep convolutional neural networks for image classification: A comprehensive
review. Neural Comput. 2017, 29, 2352–2449.
91. Tzeng, E.; Hoffman, J.; Darrell, T.; Saenko, K. Simultaneous deep transfer across domains and tasks. In
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Las Condes, Chile, 11–18 December
2015; pp. 4068–4076.
92. Ba, J.; Caruana, R. Do deep nets really need to be deep? In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems;
NIPS Proceedings; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014.
93. Urban, G.; Geras, K.J.; Kahou, S.E.; Aslan, O.; Wang, S.; Caruana, R.; Mohamed, A.; Philipose, M.;
Richardson, M. Do deep convolutional nets really need to be deep and convolutional? arXiv 2016,
arXiv:1603.05691.
94. Romero, A.; Ballas, N.; Kahou, S.E.; Chassang, A.; Gatta, C.; Bengio, Y. Fitnets: Hints for thin deep nets.
arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.6550.
95. Mishkin, D.; Matas, J. All you need is a good init. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.06422.
96. Pandey, G.; Dukkipati, A. To go deep or wide in learning? arXiv 2014, arXiv:1402.5634.
97. Ratner, A.J.; de Sa, C.M.; Wu, S.; Selsam, D.; Ré, C. Data programming: Creating large training sets, quickly.
In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 3567–3575.
98. Aberger, C.R.; Lamb, A.; Tu, S.; Nötzli, A.; Olukotun, K.; Ré, C. Emptyheaded: A relational engine for graph
processing. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2017, 42, 20.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 57 of 67
99. Iandola, F.N.; Han, S.; Moskewicz, M.W.; Ashraf, K.; Dally, W.J.; Keutzer, K. Squeezenet: Alexnet-level
accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and< 0.5 mb model size. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1602.07360.
100. Han, S.; Mao, H.; Dally, W.J. Deep compression: Compressing deep neural network with pruning, trained
quantization and huffman coding. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1510.00149.
101. Niepert, M.; Ahmed, M.; Kutzkov, K. Learning Convolutional Neural Networks for Graphs. arXiv 2016,
arXiv:1605.05273.
102. Available online: https://github.com/kjw0612/awesome-deep-vision (accessed on 17 January 2018).
103. Jia, X.; Xu, X.; Cai, B.; Guo, K. Single Image Super-Resolution Using Multi-Scale Convolutional Neural
Network. In Pacific Rim Conference on Multimedia; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 149–157.
104. Ahn, B.; Cho, N.I. Block-Matching Convolutional Neural Network for Image Denoising. arXiv 2017,
arXiv:1704.00524.
105. Ma, S.; Liu, J.; Chen, C.W. A-Lamp: Adaptive Layout-Aware Multi-Patch Deep Convolutional Neural
Network for Photo Aesthetic Assessment. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1704.00248.
106. Cao, X.; Zhou, F.; Xu, L.; Meng, D.; Xu, Z.; Paisley, J. Hyperspectral Image Classification With Markov
Random Fields and a Convolutional Neural Network. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2018, 27, 2354–2367.
107. de Vos, B.D.; Berendsen, F.F.; Viergever, M.A.; Staring, M.; Išgum, I. End-to-end unsupervised deformable
image registration with a convolutional neural network. In Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis and
Multimodal Learning for Clinical Decision Support; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 204–212.
108. Wang, X.; Oxholm, G.; Zhang, D.; Wang, Y. Multimodal transfer: A hierarchical deep convolutional neural
network for fast artistic style transfer. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; Volume 2, p. 7.
109. Babaee, M.; Dinh, D.T.; Rigoll, G. A deep convolutional neural network for background subtraction. arXiv
2017, arXiv:1702.01731.
110. Alom, M.Z.; Sidike, P.; Hasan, M.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Handwritten Bangla Character Recognition Using
the State-of-the-Art Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2018, 2018, 6747098.
111. Alom, M.Z.; Awwal, A.A.S.; Lowe-Webb, R.; Taha, T.M. Optical beam classification using deep learning: A
comparison with rule-and feature-based classification. In Proceedings of the Optics and Photonics for
Information Processing XI, San Diego, CA, USA, 6–10 August 2017; Volume 10395.
112. Sidike, P.; Sagan, V.; Maimaitijiang, M.; Maimaitiyiming, M.; Shakoor, N.; Burken, J.; Mockler, T.; Fritschi,
F.B. dPEN: deep Progressively Expanded Network for mapping heterogeneous agricultural landscape
using WorldView-3 satellite imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 2019, 221, 756–772.
113. Alom, M.Z.; Alam, M.; Taha, T.M.; Iftekharuddin, K.M. Object recognition using cellular simultaneous
recurrent networks and convolutional neural network. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Joint
Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Anchorage, AK, USA, 14–19 May 2017; pp. 2873–2880.
114. Ronao, C.A.; Cho, S.-B. Human activity recognition with smartphone sensors using deep learning neural
networks. Expert Syst. Appl. 2016, 59, 235–244.
115. Yang, J.; Nguyen, M.N.; San, P.P.; Li, X.L.; Krishnaswamy, S. Deep convolutional neural networks on
multichannel time series for human activity recognition. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–31 July 2015.
116. Hammerla, N.Y.; Halloran, S.; Ploetz, T. Deep, convolutional, and recurrent models for human activity
recognition using wearables. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1604.08880.
117. Ordóñez, F.J.; Roggen, D. Deep convolutional and lstm recurrent neural networks for multimodal wearable
activity recognition. Sensors 2016, 16, 115.
118. Rad, N.M.; Kia, S.M.; Zarbo, C.; van Laarhoven, T.; Jurman, G.; Venuti, P.; Marchiori, E.; Furlanello, C. Deep
learning for automatic stereotypical motor movement detection using wearable sensors in autism spectrum
disorders. Signal Process. 2018, 144, 180–191.
119. Ravi, D.; Wong, C.; Lo, B.; Yang, G. Deep learning for human activity recognition: A resource efficient
implementation on low-power devices. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 13th International Conference on
Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN), San Francisco, CA, USA, 14-17 June 2016; pp. 71–
76.
120. Alom, M.Z.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Microscopic Nuclei Classification, Segmentation and
Detection with improved Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) Approaches. arXiv 2018,
arXiv:1811.03447.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 58 of 67
121. Chen, L.-C.; Papandreou, G.; Kokkinos, I.; Murphy, K.; Yuille, A.L. Semantic image segmentation with deep
convolutional nets and fully connected crfs. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.7062.
122. Badrinarayanan, V.; Kendall, A.; Cipolla, R. Segnet: A deep convolutional encoder-decoder architecture for
image segmentation. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.00561.
123. Lin, G.; Milan, A.; Shen, C.; Reid, I. Refinenet: Multi-path refinement networks for high-resolution semantic
segmentation. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
(CVPR), Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 5168–5177.
124. Zhao, H.; Shi, J.; Qi, X.; Wang, X.; Jia, J. Pyramid scene parsing network. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp.
2881–2890.
125. Chen, L.-C.; Papandreou, G.; Kokkinos, I.; Murphy, K.; Yuille, A.L. Deeplab: Semantic image segmentation
with deep convolutional nets, atrous convolution, and fully connected crfs. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach.
Intell. 2018, 40, 834–848.
126. Ronneberger, O.; Fischer, P.; Brox, T. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation.
In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2015; pp. 234–241.
127. Alom, M.Z.; Hasan, M.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Recurrent Residual Convolutional Neural
Network based on U-Net (R2U-Net) for Medical Image Segmentation. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1802.06955.
128. Girshick, R.; Donahue, J.; Darrell, T.; Malik, J. Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and
semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, Columbus, OH, USA, 23–28 June 2014; pp. 580–587.
129. Lin, T.-Y.; Goyal, P.; Girshick, R.; He, K.; Dollár, P. Focal loss for dense object detection. In Proceedings of
the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy, 22–29 October 2017; pp. 2980–2988.
130. Wang, X.; Shrivastava, A.; Gupta, A. A-fast-rcnn: Hard positive generation via adversary for object
detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu,
HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017.
131. He, K.; Gkioxari, G.; Dollár, P.; Girshick, R. Mask r-cnn. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International
Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Venice, Italy, 22–29 October 2017; pp. 2980–2988.
132. Redmon, J.; Divvala, S.; Girshick, R.; Farhadi, A. You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. In
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA,
27–30 June 2016; pp. 779–788.
133. Liu, W.; Anguelov, D.; Erhan, D.; Szegedy, C.; Reed, S.; Fu, C.-Y.; Berg, A.C. Ssd: Single shot multibox
detector. In European Conference on Computer Vision; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 21–37.
134. Hou, J.-C.; Wang, S.; Lai, Y.; Tsao, Y.; Chang, H.; Wang, H. Audio-Visual Speech Enhancement Using
Multimodal Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.10893.
135. Xu, Y.; Kong, Q.; Huang, Q.; Wang, W.; Plumbley, M.D. Convolutional gated recurrent neural network
incorporating spatial features for audio tagging. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Joint Conference
on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Anchorage, AK, USA, 14–19 May 2017; pp. 3461–3466.
136. Litjens, G.; Kooi, T.; Bejnordi, B.E.; Setio, A.A.A.; Ciompi, F.; Ghafoorian, M.; van der Laak, J.A.; van
Ginneken, B.; Sánchez, C.I. A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 2017, 42,
60–88.
137. Zhang, Z.; Xie, Y.; Xing, F.; McGough, M.; Yang, L. Mdnet: A semantically and visually interpretable
medical image diagnosis network. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 6428–6436.
138. Tran, P.V. A fully convolutional neural network for cardiac segmentation in short-axis MRI. arXiv 2016,
arXiv:1604.00494.
139. Tan, J.H.U.; Acharya, R.; Bhandary, S.V.; Chua, K.C.; Sivaprasad, S. Segmentation of optic disc, fovea and
retinal vasculature using a single convolutional neural network. J. Comput. Sci. 2017, 20, 70–79.
140. Moeskops, P.; Viergever, M.A.; Mendrik, A.M.; de Vries, L.S.; Benders, M.J.N.L.; Išgum, I. Automatic
segmentation of MR brain images with a convolutional neural network. IEEE Trans. Med Imaging 2016, 35,
1252–1261.
141. Alom, M.Z.; Yakopcic, C.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Breast Cancer Classification from Histopathological
Images with Inception Recurrent Residual Convolutional Neural Network. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1811.04241.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 59 of 67
142. LeCun, Y.; Bottou, L.; Orr, G. Efficient BackProp. In Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade; Orr, G., Müller, K.,
Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1524.
143. Glorot, X.; Bengio, Y. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In
Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Sardinia,
Italy, 13–15 May 2010; pp. 249–256.
144. He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Delving deep into rectifiers: Surpassing human-level performance on
imagenet classification. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Las
Condes, Chile, 11–18 December 2015; pp. 1026–1034.
145. Vedaldi, A.; Lenc, K. Matconvnet: Convolutional neural networks for matlab. In Proceedings of the 23rd
ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Brisbane, Australia, 26–30 October 2015; pp. 689–692.
146. Laurent, C.; Pereyra, G.; Brakel, P.; Zhang, Y.; Bengio, Y. Batch normalized recurrent neural networks. In
Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing
(ICASSP), Shanghai, China, 20–25 March 2016; pp. 2657–2661.
147. Lavin, A.; Gray, S. Fast algorithms for convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 4013–
4021.
148. Clevert, D.-A.; Unterthiner, T.; Hochreiter, S. Fast and accurate deep network learning by exponential linear
units (elus). arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.07289.
149. Li, Yang, Chunxiao Fan, Yong Li, Qiong Wu, and Yue Ming. Improving deep neural network with multiple
parametric exponential linear units. Neurocomputing 2018, 301, 11–24.
150. Jin, X.; Xu, C.; Feng, J.; Wei, Y.; Xiong, J.; Yan, S. Deep Learning with S-Shaped Rectified Linear Activation
Units. AAAI 2016, 3, 2–3.
151. Xu, B.; Wang, N.; Chen, T.; Li, M. Empirical evaluation of rectified activations in convolutional network.
arXiv 2015, arXiv:1505.00853.
152. He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Spatial pyramid pooling in deep convolutional networks for visual
recognition. In European Conference on Computer Vision; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 346–361.
153. Yoo, D.; Park, S.; Lee, J.; Kweon, I.S. Multi-scale pyramid pooling for deep convolutional representation. In
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, Boston, MA,
USA, 7–12 June 2015; pp. 71–80.
154. Graham, B. Fractional max-pooling. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.6071.
155. Lee, C.-Y.; Gallagher, P.W.; Tu, Z. Generalizing pooling functions in convolutional neural networks: Mixed,
gated, and tree. In Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence and Statistics; Cadiz, Spain, 9–11 May 2016; pp.
464–472.
156. Hinton, G.E.; Srivastava, N.; Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Salakhutdinov, R.R. Improving neural networks
by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors. arXiv 2012, arXiv:1207.0580.
157. Srivastava, N.; Hinton, G.; Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Salakhutdinov, R. Dropout: A simple way to
prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2014, 15, 1929–1958.
158. Wan, L.; Zeiler, M.; Zhang, S.; le Cun, Y.; Fergus, R. Regularization of neural networks using
dropconnect. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Atlanta, GA, USA, 16–
21 June 2013; pp. 1058–1066.
159. Bulò, S.R.; Porzi, L.; Kontschieder, P. Dropout distillation. In Proceedings of the International Conference
on Machine Learning, New York, NY, USA, 20–22 June 2016; pp. 99–107.
160. Ruder, S. An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1609.04747.
161. Le, Q.V.; Ngiam, J.; Coates, A.; Lahiri, A.; Prochnow, B.; Ng, A.Y. On optimization methods for deep
learning. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on International Conference on Machine
Learning, Bellevue, WA, USA, 28 June –2 July 2011; pp. 265–272.
162. Koushik, J.; Hayashi, H. Improving stochastic gradient descent with feedback. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1611.01505.
163. Sathasivam, S.; Abdullah, W.A. Logic learning in Hopfield networks. arXiv 2008, arXiv:0804.4075.
164. Elman, J.L. Finding structure in time. Cogn. Sci. 1990, 14, 179–211.
165. Jordan, M.I. Serial order: A parallel distributed processing approach. Adv. Psychol. 1997, 121, 471–495.
166. Hochreiter, S.; Bengio, Y.; Frasconi, P.; Schmidhuber, J. Gradient Flow in Recurrent Nets: The Difficulty of
Learning Long-Term Dependencies; IEEE Press: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
167. Schmidhuber, J. Habilitation thesis: Netzwerkarchitekturen, Zielfunktionen und Kettenregel (Network
architectures, objective functions, and chain rule), PhD, Technische Universität München, 15 April 1993.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 60 of 67
168. Gers, F.A.; Schmidhuber, J. Recurrent nets that time and count. In Proceedings of the IEEE-INNS-ENNS
International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, Como, Italy, 24–27 July 2000; Volume 3.
169. Gers, F.A.; Schraudolph, N.N.; Schmidhuber, J. Learning precise timing with LSTM recurrent networks. J.
Mach. Learn. Res. 2002, 3, 115–143.
170. Socher, R.; Lin, C.C.; Manning, C.; Ng, A.Y. Parsing natural scenes and natural language with recursive
neural networks. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-11),
Bellevue, WA, USA, 28 June–2 July 2011; pp. 129–136.
171. Mikolov, T.; Karafiát, M.; Burget, L.; Černocký, J.; Khudanpur, S. Recurrent neural network based language
model. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication
Association. Makuhari, Chiba, Japan, 26–30 September 2010; Volume 2.
172. Xingjian, S.H.I.; Chen, Z.; Wang, H.; Yeung, D.; Wong, W.; Woo, W. Convolutional LSTM network: A
machine learning approach for precipitation nowcasting. In Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems (NIPS); NIPS Proceedings; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015; pp. 802–810.
173. Chung, J.; Gulcehre, C.; Cho, K.; Bengio, Y. Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on
sequence modeling. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.3555.
174. Jozefowicz, R.; Zaremba, W.; Sutskever, I. An empirical exploration of recurrent network architectures. In
Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-15), Lille, France, 6–11 July
2015.
175. Yao, K.; Cohn, T.; Vylomova, K.; Duh, K.; Dyer, C. Depth-gated recurrent neural networks. arXiv 2015,
arXiv:1508.03790.
176. Koutnik, J.; Greff, K.; Gomez, F.; Schmidhuber, J. A clockwork rnn. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1402.3511.
177. Greff, K.; Srivastava, R.K.; Koutník, J.; Steunebrink, B.R.; Schmidhuber, J. LSTM: A search space odyssey.
IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2017, 28, 2222–2232.
178. Karpathy, A.; Li, F.-F. Deep visual-semantic alignments for generating image descriptions. In Proceedings
of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015.
179. Mikolov, T.; Chen, K.; Corrado, G.; Dean, J. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space.
arXiv 2013, arXiv:1301.3781.
180. Goldberg, Y.; Levy, O. word2vec Explained: Deriving Mikolov et al.'s negative-sampling word-embedding
method. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1402.3722.
181. Kunihiko F. Neural network model for selective attention in visual pattern recognition and associative
recall. Appl. Opt. 1987, 26, 4985–4992.
182. Xu, K.; Ba, J.; Kiros, R.; Cho, K.; Courville, A.; Salakhudinov, R.; Zemel, R.; Bengio, Y. Show, attend and tell:
Neural image caption generation with visual attention. In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Machine Learning, Lille, France, 6–11 July 2015; pp. 2048–2057.
183. Qin, Y.; Song, D.; Chen, H.; Cheng, W.; Jiang, G.; Cottrell, G. A dual-stage attention-based recurrent neural
network for time series prediction. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1704.02971.
184. Xiong, C.; Merity, S.; Socher, R. Dynamic memory networks for visual and textual question answering. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, New York, NY, USA, 20–22 June 2016.
185. Oord, A.v.d.; Kalchbrenner, N.; Kavukcuoglu, K. Pixel recurrent neural networks. arXiv 2016,
arXiv:1601.06759.
186. Xue, W.; Nachum, I.B.; Pandey, S.; Warrington, J.; Leung, S.; Li, S. Direct estimation of regional wall
thicknesses via residual recurrent neural network. In International Conference on Information Processing in
Medical Imaging; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 505–516.
187. Tjandra, A.; Sakti, S.; Manurung, R.; Adriani, M.; Nakamura, S. Gated recurrent neural tensor network. In
Proceedings of the 2016 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Vancouver, BC,
Canada, 24–29 July 2016; pp. 448–455.
188. Wang, S.; Jing, J. Learning natural language inference with LSTM. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1512.08849.
189. Sutskever, I.; Vinyals, O.; Le, Q.V. Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Advances in
Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS); MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 3104–3112.
190. Lakhani, V.A.; Mahadev, R. Multi-Language Identification Using Convolutional Recurrent Neural
Network. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1611.04010.
191. Längkvist, M.; Karlsson, L.; Loutfi, A. A review of unsupervised feature learning and deep learning for
time-series modeling. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 2014, 42, 11–24.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 61 of 67
192. Malhotra, P.; Vishnu, T.V.; Vig, L.; Agarwal, P.; Shroff, G. TimeNet: Pre-trained deep recurrent neural
network for time series classification. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.08838.
193. Soltau, H.; Liao, H.; Sak, H. Neural speech recognizer: Acoustic-to-word LSTM model for large vocabulary
speech recognition. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1610.09975.
194. Sak, H.; Senior, A.; Beaufays, F. Long short-term memory recurrent neural network architectures for large
scale acoustic modeling. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the International Speech
Communication Association, Singapore, 14–18 September 2014.
195. Adavanne, S.; Pertilä, P.; Virtanen, T. Sound event detection using spatial features and convolutional
recurrent neural network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.02291.
196. Chien, J.-T.; Misbullah, A. Deep long short-term memory networks for speech recognition. In Proceedings
of the 2016 10th International Symposium on Chinese Spoken Language Processing (ISCSLP), Tianjin,
China, 17–20 October 2016.
197. Choi, E.; Schuetz, A.; Stewart, W.F.; Sun, J. Using recurrent neural network models for early detection of
heart failure onset. J. Am. Med Inform. Assoc. 2016, 24, 361–370.
198. Azzouni, A.; Pujolle, G. A Long Short-Term Memory Recurrent Neural Network Framework for Network
Traffic Matrix Prediction. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.05690.
199. Olabiyi, O.; Martinson, E.; Chintalapudi, V.; Guo, R. Driver Action Prediction Using Deep (Bidirectional)
Recurrent Neural Network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.02257.
200. Kim, B.D.; Kang, C.M.; Lee, S.H.; Chae, H.; Kim, J.; Chung, C.C.; Choi, J.W. Probabilistic vehicle trajectory
prediction over occupancy grid map via recurrent neural network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1704.07049.
201. Richard, A.; Gall, J. A bag-of-words equivalent recurrent neural network for action recognition. Comput.
Vis. Image Underst. 2017, 156, 79–91.
202. Bontemps, L.; McDermott, J.; Le-Khac, N.-H. Collective Anomaly Detection Based on Long Short-Term
Memory Recurrent Neural Networks. In International Conference on Future Data and Security Engineering;
Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016.
203. Kingma, D.P.; Welling, M. Stochastic gradient VB and the variational auto-encoder. In Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), Banff, AB, Canada, 14–16 April 2014.
204. Ng, A. Sparse autoencoder. CS294A Lect. Notes 2011, 72, 1–19.
205. Vincent, P.; Larochelle, H.; Lajoie, I.; Bengio, Y.; Manzagol, Pi. Stacked denoising autoencoders: Learning
useful representations in a deep network with a local denoising criterion. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2010, 11, 3371–
3408.
206. Zhang, R.; Isola, P.; Efros, A.A. Split-brain autoencoders: Unsupervised learning by cross-channel
prediction. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1611.09842.
207. Lu, J.; Deshpande, A.; Forsyth, D. CDVAE: Co-embedding Deep Variational Auto Encoder for Conditional
Variational Generation. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1612.00132.
208. Chicco, D.; Sadowski, P.; Baldi, P. Deep Autoencoder Neural Networks for Gene Ontology Annotation
Predictions. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, and
Health Informatics—BCB ’14, Niagara Falls, NY, USA, 2–4 August 2010; pp. 533–540.
209. Alom, M.Z.; Taha, T.M. Network Intrusion Detection for Cyber Security using Unsupervised Deep
Learning Approaches. In Proceedings of the Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON), Dayton,
OH, USA, 27–30 June 2017.
210. Song, C.; Liu, F.; Huang, Y.; Wang, L.; Tan, T. Auto-encoder based data clustering. In Iberoamerican Congress
on Pattern Recognition; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 117–124.
211. Ahmad, M.; Protasov, S.; Khan, A.M. Hyperspectral Band Selection Using Unsupervised Non-Linear Deep
Auto Encoder to Train External Classifiers. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.06920.
212. Freund, Y.; Haussler, D. Unsupervised learning of distributions on binary vectors using two layer
networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1992; pp.
912–919.
213. Larochelle, H.; Bengio, Y. Classification using discriminative restricted Boltzmann machines. In
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, Finland, 5–9 July 2008.
214. Salakhutdinov, R.; Hinton, G.E. Deep Boltzmann machines. AISTATS 2009, 1, 3.
215. Alom, M.Z.; Bontupalli, V.R.; Taha, T.M. Intrusion detection using deep belief networks. In Proceedings of
the Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON), Dayton, OH, USA, 16–19 June 2015.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 62 of 67
216. Alom, M.Z.; Sidike, P.; Taha, T.M.; Asari, V.K. Handwritten bangla digit recognition using deep learning.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.02680.
217. Albalooshi, F.A.; Sidike, P.; Sagan, V.; Albalooshi, Y.; Asari, V.K. Deep Belief Active Contours (DBAC) with
Its Application to Oil Spill Segmentation from Remotely Sensed Aerial Imagery. Photogramm. Eng. Remote
Sens. 2018, 84, 451–458.
218. Mao, X.; Li, Q.; Xie, H.; Lau, R.Y.K.; Wang, Z.; Smolley, S.P. Least squares generative adversarial networks.
In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy, 22–29 October 2017;
pp. 2794–2802.
219. Salimans, T.; Goodfellow, I.; Zaremba, W.; Cheung, V.; Radford, A.; Chen, X. Improved techniques for
training gans. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1606.03498.
220. Vondrick, C.; Pirsiavash, H.; Torralba, A. Generating videos with scene dynamics. In Advances in Neural
Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 613–621.
221. Radford, A.; Metz, L.; Chintala, S. Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional
generative adversarial networks. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.06434.
222. Wang, X.; Gupta, A. Generative image modeling using style and structure adversarial networks. In
European Conference on Computer Vision; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016.
223. Chen, X.; Duan, Y.; Houthooft, R.; Schulman, J.; Sutskever, I.; Abbeel, P. InfoGAN: Interpretable
representation learning by information maximizing generative adversarial nets. In Advances in Neural
Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
224. Im, D.J.; Kim, C.D.; Jiang, H.; Memisevic, R. Generating images with recurrent adversarial networks. arXiv
2016, arxiv.org/abs/ 1602.05110.
225. Isola, P.; Zhu, J.; Zhou, T.; Efros, A.A. Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1611.07004.
226. Liu, M.-Y.; Tuzel, O. Coupled generative adversarial networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
227. Donahue, J.; Krähenbühl, P.; Darrell, T. Adversarial feature learning. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1605.09782.
228. Berthelot, D.; Schumm, T.; Metz, L. Began: Boundary equilibrium generative adversarial networks. arXiv
2017, arXiv:1703.10717.
229. Martin A.; Chintala, S.; Bottou, L. Wasserstein gan. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.07875.
230. Gulrajani, I.; Ahmed, F.; Arjovsky, M.; Dumoulin, V.; Courville, A.C. Improved training of wasserstein
gans. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 5767–
5777.
231. He, K.; Wang, Y.; Hopcroft, J. A powerful generative model using random weights for the deep image
representation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
232. Kos, J.; Fischer, I.; Song, D. Adversarial examples for generative models. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1702.06832.
233. Zhao, J.; Mathieu, M.; LeCun, Y. Energy-based generative adversarial network. arXiv 2016,
arXiv:1609.03126.
234. Park, N.; Anand, A.; Moniz, J.R.A.; Lee, K.; Chakraborty, T.; Choo, J.; Park, H.; Kim, Y. MMGAN: Manifold
Matching Generative Adversarial Network for Generating Images. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1707.08273.
235. Laloy, E.; Hérault, R.; Jacques, D.; Linde, N. Efficient training-image based geostatistical simulation and
inversion using a spatial generative adversarial neural network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1708.04975.
236. Eghbal-zadeh, H.; Widmer, G. Probabilistic Generative Adversarial Networks. arXiv 2017,
arXiv:1708.01886.
237. Fowkes, J.; Sutton, C. A Bayesian Network Model for Interesting Itemsets. In Joint European Conference on
Machine Learning and Knowledge Disco in Databases; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland,
2016.
238. Mescheder, L.; Nowozin, S.; Geiger, A. Adversarial variational bayes: Unifying variational autoencoders
and generative adversarial networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.04722.
239. Nowozin, S.; Cseke, B.; Tomioka, R. f-gan: Training generative neural samplers using variational
divergence minimization. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA,
USA, 2016.
240. Li, C.; Wand, M. Precomputed real-time texture synthesis with markovian generative adversarial networks.
In European Conference on Computer Vision; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 63 of 67
241. Du, C.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, B. Learning Deep Generative Models with Doubly Stochastic Gradient MCMC. IEEE
Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst. 2018, 29, 3084–3096.
242. Hoang, Quan, Tu Dinh Nguyen, Trung Le, and Dinh Phung. Multi-Generator Gernerative Adversarial
Nets. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1708.02556.
243. Bousmalis, K.; Silberman, N.; Dohan, D.; Erhan, D.; Krishnan, D. Unsupervised pixel-level domain
adaptation with generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer
Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; Volume 1, p. 7.
244. Kansky, K.; Silver, T.; Mély, D.A.; Eldawy, M.; Lázaro-Gredilla, M.; Lou, X.; Dorfman, N.; Sidor, S.; Phoenix,
S.; George, D. Schema networks: Zero-shot transfer with a generative causal model of intuitive physics.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.04317.
245. Ledig, C.; Theis, L.; Huszár, F.; Caballero, J.; Cunningham, A.; Acosta, A.; Aitken, A.; Tejani, A.; Totz, J.;
Wang, Z.; et al. Photo-realistic single image super-resolution using a generative adversarial network. arXiv
2016, arXiv:1609.04802.
246. Souly, N.; Spampinato, C.; Shah, M. Semi and Weakly Supervised Semantic Segmentation Using
Generative Adversarial Network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.09695.
247. Dash, A.; Gamboa, J.C.B.; Ahmed, S.; Liwicki, M.; Afzal, M.Z. TAC-GAN-text conditioned auxiliary
classifier generative adversarial network. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.06412.
248. Zhang, H.; Dana, K. Multi-style Generative Network for Real-time Transfer. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.06953.
249. Zhang, H.; Sindagi, V.; Patel, V.M. Image De-raining Using a Conditional Generative Adversarial Network.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1701.05957.
250. Serban, I.V.; Sordoni, A.; Bengio, Y.; Courville, A.C.; Pineau, J. Building End-To-End Dialogue Systems
Using Generative Hierarchical Neural Network Models. AAAI 2016, 16, 3776–3784.
251. Pascual, S.; Bonafonte, A.; Serrà, J. SEGAN: Speech Enhancement Generative Adversarial Network. arXiv
2017, arXiv:1703.09452.
252. Yang, L.-C.; Chou, S.-Z.; Yang, Y.-I. MidiNet: A convolutional generative adversarial network for symbolic-
domain music generation. In Proceedings of the 18th International Society for Music Information Retrieval
Conference (ISMIR’2017), Suzhou, China, 23–27 October 2017.
253. Yang, Q.; Yan, P.; Zhang, Y.; Yu, H.; Shi, Y.; Mou, X.; Kalra, M.K.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, L.; Wang, G. Low-dose
CT image denoising using a generative adversarial network with Wasserstein distance and perceptual loss.
IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2018, 37, 1348–1357.
254. Rezaei, M.; Harmuth, K.; Gierke, W.; Kellermeier, T.; Fischer, M.; Yang, H.; Meinel, C. A conditional
adversarial network for semantic segmentation of brain tumor. In International MICCAI Brainlesion
Workshop; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 241–252.
255. Xue, Y.; Xu, T.; Zhang, H.; Long, L.R.; Huang, X. Segan: Adversarial network with multi-scale l 1 loss for
medical image segmentation. Neuroinformatics 2018, 16, 383–392.
256. Mardani, M.; Gong, E.; Cheng, J.Y.; Vasanawala, S.; Zaharchuk, G.; Alley, M.; Thakur, N.; Han, S.; Dally,
W.; Pauly, J.M.; et al. Deep generative adversarial networks for compressed sensing automates MRI. arXiv
2017, arXiv:1706.00051.
257. Choi, E.; Biswal, S.; Malin, B.; Duke, J.; Stewart, W.F.; Sun, J. Generating Multilabel Discrete Electronic
Health Records Using Generative Adversarial Networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.06490.
258. Esteban, C.; Hyland, S.L.; Rätsch, G. Real-valued (medical) time series generation with recurrent
conditional gans. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.02633.
259. Hayes, J.; Melis, L.; Danezis, G.; de Cristofaro, E. LOGAN: evaluating privacy leakage of generative models
using generative adversarial networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.07663.
260. Gordon, J.; Hernández-Lobato, J.M. Bayesian Semisupervised Learning with Deep Generative Models.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.09751.
261. Abbasnejad, M.E.; Shi, Q.; Abbasnejad, I.; van den Hengel, A.; Dick, A. Bayesian conditional generative
adverserial networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.05477.
262. Grnarova, P.; Levy, K.Y.; Lucchi, A.; Hofmann, T.; Krause, A. An online learning approach to generative
adversarial networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1706.03269.
263. Li, Y.; Swersky, K.; Zemel, R. Generative moment matching networks. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Machine Learning, Lille, France, 6–11 July 2015; pp. 1718–1727.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 64 of 67
264. Li, C.-L.; Chang, W.; Cheng, Y.; Yang, Y.; Póczos, B. Mmd gan: Towards deeper understanding of moment
matching network. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA,
2017; pp. 2203–2213.
265. Nie, X.; Feng, J.; Xing, J.; Yan, S. Generative partition networks for multi-person pose estimation. arXiv 2017,
arXiv:1705.07422.
266. Saeedi, A.; Hoffman, M.D.; DiVerdi, S.J.; Ghandeharioun, A.; Johnson, M.J.; Adams, R.P. Multimodal
prediction and personalization of photo edits with deep generative models. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1704.04997.
267. Schlegl, T.; Seeböck, P.; Waldstein, S.M.; Schmidt-Erfurth, U.; Langs, G. Unsupervised anomaly detection
with generative adversarial networks to guide marker discovery. In International Conference on Information
Processing in Medical Imaging; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 146–157.
268. Liu, M.-Y.; Breuel, T.; Kautz, J. Unsupervised image-to-image translation networks. In Advances in Neural
269. Mehrotra, A.; Dukkipati, A. Generative Adversarial Residual Pairwise Networks for One Shot Learning.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.08033.
270. Sordoni, A.; Galley, M.; Auli, M.; Brockett, C.; Ji, Y.; Mitchell, M.; Nie, J.; Gao, J.; Dolan, B. A neural network
approach to context-sensitive generation of conversational responses. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1506.06714.
271. Yin, J.; Jiang, X.; Lu, Z.; Shang, L.; Li, H.; Li, X. Neural generative question answering. arXiv 2015,
arXiv:1512.01337.
272. Oord, A.v.d.; Dieleman, S.; Zen, H.; Simonyan, K.; Vinyals, O.; Graves, A.; Kalchbrenner, N.; Senior, A.;
Kavukcuoglu, K. Wavenet: A generative model for raw audio. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1609.03499.
273. Chen, Y.; Li, J.; Xiao, H.; Jin, X.; Yan, S.; Feng, J. Dual path networks. In Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 4467–4475.
274. Mahmud, M.; Kaiser, M.S.; Hussain, A.; Vassanelli, S. Applications of deep learning and reinforcement
learning to biological data. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2018, 29, 2063–2079.
275. Goodfellow, I.; Bengio, Y.; Courville, A. Deep Learning; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
276. Silver, D.; Huang, A.; Maddison, C.J.; Guez, A.; Sifre, L.; van den Driessche, G.; Schrittwieser, J. Mastering
the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 2016, 529, 484.
277. Vinyals, O.; Ewalds, T.; Bartunov, S.; Georgiev, P.; Vezhnevets, A.S.; Yeo, M.; Makhzani, A.; Küttler, H.;
Agapiou, J.; Schrittwieser, J.; et al. Starcraft ii: A new challenge for reinforcement learning. arXiv 2017,
arXiv:1708.04782.
278. Koenig, S.; Simmons, R.G. Complexity Analysis of Real-Time Reinforcement Learning Applied to Finding Shortest
Paths in Deterministic Domains; Tech. Report, No. CMU-CS-93-106; Computer Science Department,
Carnegie-Mellon University: Pittsburgh PA, Decemver, 1992.
279. Silver, D.; Schrittwieser, J.; Simonyan, K.; Antonoglou, I.; Huang, A.; Guez, A.; Hubert, T.; Baker, L.; Lai,
M.; Bolton, A.; et al. Mastering the game of go without human knowledge. Nature 2017, 550, 354.
280. Schulman, J.; Levine, S.; Abbeel, P.; Jordan, M.I.; Moritz, P. Trust Region Policy Optimization. In
Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-15), Lille, France, 6–11 July
2015; Volume 37, pp. 1889–1897.
281. Levine, S.; Finn, C.; Darrell, T.; Abbeel, P. End-to-end training of deep visuomotor policies. J. Mach. Learn.
Res. 2016, 17, 1334–1373.
282. Mnih, V.; Badia, A.P.; Mirza, M.; Graves, A.; Lillicrap, T.; Harley, T.; Silver, D.; Kavukcuoglu, K.
Asynchronous methods for deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference
on Machine Learning, New York, NY, USA, 20–22 June 2016; pp. 1928–1937.
283. Arulkumaran, K.; Deisenroth, M.P.; Brundage, M.; Bharath, A.A. A brief survey of deep reinforcement
learning. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1708.05866.
284. Zhu, F.; Liao, P.; Zhu, X.; Yao, Y.; Huang, J. Cohesion-based online actor-critic reinforcement learning for
mhealth intervention. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1703.10039.
285. Zhu, F.; Guo, J.; Xu, Z.; Liao, P.; Yang, L.; Huang, J. Group-driven reinforcement learning for personalized
mhealth intervention. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted
Intervention, pp. 590-598. Springer, Cham, 2018.
286. Steckelmacher, Denis, Diederik M. Roijers, Anna Harutyunyan, Peter Vrancx, Hélène Plisnier, and Ann
Nowé. Reinforcement learning in POMDPs with memoryless options and option-observation initiation
sets. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, LA,
USA, 2–7 February 2018.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 65 of 67
287. Hu, H.; Zhang, X.; Yan, X.; Wang, L.; Xu, Y. Solving a new 3d bin packing problem with deep reinforcement
learning method. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1708.05930.
288. Everitt, T.; Krakovna, V.; Orseau, L.; Hutter, M.; Legg, S. Reinforcement learning with a corrupted reward
channel. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.08417.
289. Wu, Y.; Mansimov, E.; Grosse, R.B.; Liao, S.; Ba, J. Scalable trust-region method for deep reinforcement
learning using kronecker-factored approximation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, MIT
Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 5279–5288.
290. Denil, M.; Agrawal, P.; Kulkarni, T.D.; Erez, T.; Battaglia, P.; de Freitas, N. Learning to perform physics
experiments via deep reinforcement learning. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1611.01843.
291. Hein, D.; Hentschel, A.; Runkler, T.; Udluft, S. Particle swarm optimization for generating interpretable
fuzzy reinforcement learning policies. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2017, 65, 87–98.
292. Islam, R.; Henderson, P.; Gomrokchi, M.; Precup, D. Reproducibility of benchmarked deep reinforcement
learning tasks for continuous control. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1708.04133.
293. Inoue, T.; de Magistris, G.; Munawar, A.; Yokoya, T.; Tachibana, R. Deep reinforcement learning for high
precision assembly tasks. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 24–28 September 2017; pp. 819–825.
294. Li, K.; Burdick, J.W. Inverse Reinforcement Learning in Large State Spaces via Function Approximation.
arXiv 2017, arXiv:1707.09394.
295. Liu, N.; Li, Z.; Xu, J.; Xu, Z.; Lin, S.; Qiu, Q.; Tang, J.; Wang, Y. A hierarchical framework of cloud resource
allocation and power management using deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE
37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Atlanta, GA, USA, 5–8 June
2017; pp. 372–382.
296. Cao, Q.; Lin, L.; Shi, Y.; Liang, X.; Li, G. Attention-aware face hallucination via deep reinforcement learning.
In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA,
21–26 July 2017; pp. 690–698.
297. Kendall, A.; Gal, Y. What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision? In
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS); MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017.
298. Kendall, A.; Gal, Y.; Cipolla, R. Multi-task learning using uncertainty to weigh losses for scene geometry
and semantics. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.07115.
299. Available online: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/07/01/google-apologizes-after-photos-
identify-black-people-as-gorillas/29567465/ (accessed on 1 March 2019).
300. Gal, Y.; Ghahramani, Z. Bayesian convolutional neural networks with Bernoulli approximate variational
inference. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1506.02158.
301. Kumar, S.; Laumann, F.; Maurin, A.L.; Olsen, M.; Bayesian, M.L. Convolutional Neural Networks with
Variational Inference. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1704.02798.
302. Vladimirova, M.; Arbel, J.; Mesejo, P. Bayesian neural networks become heavier-tailed with depth. In
Proceedings of the Bayesian Deep Learning Workshop during the Thirty-Second Conference on Neural
Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2018), Montréal, QC, Canada, 7 December 2018.
303. Hu, S.X.; Champs-sur-Marne, F.; Moreno, P.G.; Lawrence, N.; Damianou, A. β-BNN: A Rate-Distortion
Perspective on Bayesian Neural Networks In Proceedings of the Bayesian Deep Learning Workshop during
the Thirty-Second Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2018), Montréal, QC,
Canada, 7 December 2018.
304. Salvator L.; Han, J.; Schroers, C.; Mandt, S. Video Compression through Deep Bayesian Learning Bayesian
In Proceedings of the Deep Learning Workshop during the Thirty-Second Conference on Neural
Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2018), Montréal, QC, Canada, 7 December 2018.
305. Krishnan, R.; Subedar, M.; Tickoo, O. BAR: Bayesian Activity Recognition using variational inference. arXiv
2018, arXiv:1811.03305.
306. Chen, T.; Goodfellow, I.; Shlens, J. Net2net: Accelerating learning via knowledge transfer. arXiv 2015,
arXiv:1511.05641.
307. Ganin, Y.; Lempitsky, V. Unsupervised domain adaptation by backpropagation. arXiv 2014,
arXiv:1409.7495.
308. Ganin, Y.; Ustinova, E.; Ajakan, H.; Germain, P.; Larochelle, H.; Laviolette, F.; Marchand, M.; Lempitsky,
V. Domain-adversarial training of neural networks. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2016, 17, 2096–2030.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 66 of 67
309. Taylor, M.E.; Stone, P. Transfer learning for reinforcement learning domains: A survey. J. Mach. Learn. Res.
2009, 10, 1633–1685.
310. McKeough, A. Teaching for Transfer: Fostering Generalization in Learning; Routledge: London, UK, 2013.
311. Raina, R.; Battle, A.; Lee, H.; Packer, B.; Ng, A.Y. Self-taught learning: transfer learning from unlabeled
data. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning, Corvallis, OR, USA, 20–24
June 2007; pp. 759–766.
312. Wenyuan, D.; Yang, Q.; Xue, G.; Yu, Y. Boosting for transfer learning. In Proceedings of the 24th
International Conference on Machine Learning, Corvallis, OR, USA, 20–24 June 2007; pp. 193–200.
313. Wu, Y.; Schuster, M.; Chen, Z.; Le, Q.V.; Norouzi, M.; Macherey, W.; Krikun, M.; Cao, Y.; Gao, Q.; Macherey,
K.; et al. Google's neural machine translation system: Bridging the gap between human and machine
translation. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1609.08144.
314. Qiu, J.; Wang, J.; Yao, S.; Guo, K.; Li, B.; Zhou, E.; Yu, J.; Tang, T.; Xu, N.; Song, S.; et al. Going deeper with
embedded fpga platform for convolutional neural network. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM/SIGDA
International Symposium on Field-Programmable Gate Arrays, Monterey, CA, USA, 21–23 February 2016;
pp. 26–35.
315. He, K.; Sun, J. Convolutional neural networks at constrained time cost. In Proceedings of the IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015; pp. 5353–
5360.
316. Lin, Z.; Courbariaux, M.; Memisevic, R.; Bengio, Y. Neural networks with few multiplications. arXiv 2015,
arXiv:1510.03009.
317. Courbariaux, M.; David, J.-E.; Bengio, Y. Training deep neural networks with low precision multiplications.
arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.7024.
318. Courbariaux, M.; Bengio, Y.; David, J.-P. Binaryconnect: Training deep neural networks with binary
weights during propagations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; MIT Press: Cambridge,
MA, USA, 2015.
319. Hubara, I.; Soudry, D.; El Yaniv, R. Binarized Neural Networks. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1602.02505.
320. Kim, M.; Smaragdis, P. Bitwise neural networks. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1601.06071.
321. Dettmers, T. 8-Bit Approximations for Parallelism in Deep Learning. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.04561.
322. Gupta, S.; Agrawal, A.; Gopalakrishnan, K.; Narayanan, P. Deep learning with limited numerical precision.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Lille, France, 6–11 July 2015; pp. 1737–
1746.
323. Zhou, S.; Wu, Y.; Ni, Z.; Zhou, X.; Wen, H.; Zou, Y. Dorefa-net: Training low bitwidth convolutional neural
networks with low bitwidth gradients. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1606.06160.
324. Merolla, P.A.; Arthur, J.V.; Alvarez-Icaza, R.; Cassidy, A.S.; Sawada, J.; Akopyan, F.; Jackson, B.L.; et al. A
million spiking-neuron integrated circuit with a scalable communication network and interface. Science
2014, 345, 668–673.
325. Steven, K.E.; Merolla, P.A.; Arthur, J.V.; Cassidy, A.S. Convolutional networks for fast, energy-efficient
neuromorphic computing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 27, 201604850.
326. Zidan, M.A. Strachan, J.P.; Lu, W.D. The future of electronics based on memristive systems. Nat. Electron.
2018, 1, 22.
327. Chen, Y.-H.; Krishna, T.; Emer, J.S.; Sze, V. Eyeriss: An energy-efficient reconfigurable accelerator for deep
convolutional neural networks. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 2017, 52, 127–138.
328. Chen, Y.; Luo, T.; Liu, S.; Zhang, S.; He, L.; Wang, J.; Li, L.; Chen, T.; Xu, Z.; Sun, N.; et al. Dadiannao: A
machine-learning supercomputer. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium
on Microarchitecture, Cambridge, UK, 13–17 December 2014; pp. 609–622.
329. Jouppi, N.P.; Young, C.; Patil, N.; Patterson, D.; Agrawal, G.; Bajwa, R.; Bates, S.; Bhatia, S.; Boden, N.;
Borchers, A.; et al. In-datacenter performance analysis of a tensor processing unit. In Proceedings of the
2017 ACM/IEEE 44th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), Toronto, ON,
Canada, 24–28 June 2017; pp. 1–12.
330. Han, S.; Liu, X.; Mao, H.; Pu, J.; Pedram, A.; Horowitz, M.A.; Dally, W.J. EIE: Efficient inference engine on
compressed deep neural network. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM/IEEE 43rd Annual International
Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), Seoul, Korea, 18–22 June 2016; pp. 243–254.
Electronics 2019, 8, 292 67 of 67
331. Zhang, X.; Zou, J.; Ming, X.; He, K.; Sun, J. Efficient and accurate approximations of nonlinear convolutional
networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston,
MA, USA, 7–12 June 2015; pp. 1984–1992.
332. Novikov, A.; Podoprikhin, D.; Osokin, A.; Vetrov, D.P. Tensorizing neural networks. In Advances in Neural
333. Zhu, C.; Han, S.; Mao, H.; Dally, W.J. Trained ternary quantization. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1612.01064.
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Electronics 08 00292 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Electronics 08 00292 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Review

A State-of-the-Art Survey on Deep Learning Theory

4 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, CA 94550, USA;

vanessen1@llnl.gov (B.C.V.E.); awwal1@llnl.gov (A.A.S.A.)

Received: 17 January 2019; Accepted: 31 January 2019; Published: 5 March 2019

Electronics 2019, 8, 292; doi:10.3390/electronics8030292 www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

1.1. Type of Deep Learning Approaches

1.1.1. Deep Supervised Learning

1.1.2. Deep Semi-supervised Learning

1.1.3. Deep Unsupervised Learning

1.1.4. Deep Reinforcement Learning (RL)

Figure 2. Category of Deep Leaning approaches.

1.2. Feature Learning

Table 1. Different feature learning approaches.

Approaches Learning steps

1.3. Why and When to apply DL

1.4. The State-of-the-art Performance of DL

The experimental results on ImageNet-2012

AlexNet[7] Clarifia[8] VGG-16 [9] GoogLeNet- ResNet- Human

Figure 3. Accuracy for ImageNet classification challenge with different DL models.

Phone error rate (PER) in percentage(%)

CDNN w. Hater.s Pooling[18]

DSC with 2nd pass[16]

Discriminative segmetal cascade (DSC)[16]

Deep Segmental NN[15]

First-pass SCRF [13]

Semantic segmentation [27]

Nuclei segmentation [28] Blood cell classification [29]

Figure 6. Example images where DL is applied successfully and achieved state-of-the-art

1.5. Why DL?

1.5.1. Universal Learning Approach

2. Deep Neural Network

2.1. The History of DNN

Figure 8. The history of deep learning development [50–57].

2.2. Gradient Descent

2.3. Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD)

2.4. Back-Propagation (BP)

2.6. Learning Rate ( )

2.7. Weight Decay

3. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)

3.1. CNN Overview

3.1.1. Convolutional Layer

3.1.2. Sub-sampling Layer

3.1.3. Classification Layer

3.1.4. Network Parameters and Required Memory for CNN

3.2. Popular CNN Architectures

3.2.1. LeNet (1998)

Figure 11. The architecture of LeNet.

3.2.2. AlexNet (2012)

3.2.3. ZFNet / Clarifai (2013)

3.2.4. Network in Network (NiN)

3.2.5. VGGNET (2014)

3.2.6. GoogLeNet (2014)

Figure 14. Inception layer: Naive version.

Figure 15. Inception layer with dimension reduction.

3.2.7. Residual Network (ResNet in 2015)

Figure 16. Basic diagram of the Residual block.

Mathematically, this concept can be represented as

3.2.8. Densely Connected Network (DenseNet)

Figure 18. A 4-layer Dense block with a growth rate of = 3.

3.2.9. FractalNet (2016)

3.4. Comparison of Different Models

LeNet-5 AlexNet OverFeat VGG-16 GoogLeNet ResNet-